[MassHistPres] Fire Rating

[Michael J Tubin]

Thank you all for the fantastic responses, the building commissioner’s opinion of the Mass General Law is

 

In my opinion, the Historic Commission can not prevent a property owner from meeting the Building Official’s requirement to construct the exterior of a building in such a way that satisfies a particular “fire rating”.  With that said, the Historic Commission does have jurisdiction to approve or deny the appearance of the building if there are alternatives or other options to achieve the appearance desired while still satisfying the “safety” requirement.  For example, if the siding on the building needs to be a fiber cement type material to achieve a fire rating, the Historic Commission must accept that however they do have the ability to approve any of the options that are available with that product (regardless of cost), such as clapboard or shingle style (and color) fiber cement siding.  

Lastly, I do feel it is in the best interest for all involved to understand the difficulty with respect to compliance with all regulatory requirements in our downtown area between building and historic.  I am sure there is a happy medium that we can all accept and move forward in a constructive manner.  Please feel free to reach out if there is anything else.  

 

As stated by Ward Hamilton I believe it is the building owner’s responsibility to propose a suitable historic material that also meets the fire rating requirements of the town. 

 

Thank you,

Michael Tubin

Plymouth Historic Commission

 

From: MassHistPres <masshistpres-bounces at cs.umb.edu> On Behalf Of Ralph Slate
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2022 10:00 AM
To: Ward Hamilton <melrosehistcomm at gmail.com>
Cc: Masshistpres <masshistpres at cs.umb.edu>
Subject: Re: [MassHistPres] Fire Rating

 

Does the building commissioner need to provide a technical rationale to require homeowners to use fireproof materials? I can understand such a requirement in a community where houses are attached to each other, but what about a neighborhood of freestanding Colonial or Victorian houses? Can a building commissioner simply rule that all siding must be fireproof out of a personal preference, or based on a claim that global warming is making wind-driven fires more likely?

Thanks,

Ralph Slate
Springfield, MA




On 1/20/2022 5:54 AM, Ward Hamilton wrote:

Other than new construction, it would seem that this concern would only become an issue when the applicant wants to secure a permit to replace the wooden clapboard cladding on the wall(s) of the building. It is rare for the condition to be such that even half of the clapboards warrant replacement.  

 

The correct, preservation approach is to replace pieces of cladding that have failed (rotted, bowing, unable to hold paint coatings) with new ones. Even if the failures extended from the foundation to four or five feet above grade, one wouldn't allow the remaining historic building fabric to be replaced. 

 

This may cause the following objection: "The building commissioner is requiring us to use fireproof materials, such as HardiPlank, and they don't match the wooden clapboards, so we have to do the whole thing." Not so fast, you say.

 

The building commissioner has the right to force owners to use new materials that are fireproof, but he doesn't have the right to compel owners to remove existing materials that are in fair, serviceable condition and replace them even if that's what the owner wants.

 

You have the power to limit the scope of work to the materials that are failing and require in kind replacement materials. In kind, meaning size (dimensions and profile), exposure to the weather (the reveal) and composition (in this case, wood). You may consider substitute materials that will be painted for a variety of reasons, including the demands of the building commissioner. 

 

However, the onus is on the owner to present substitute materials that will work with the abutting, existing building fabric. HardiPlank doesn't work? Come back with something else. Can't find something else? Keep looking.

 

What you may find is that, even if they do find a product that replicates the profile of a cedar clapboard, they don't want to use them. After the whole side of the building is painted, the new flat, smooth materials stand in contrast to the older materials. They were hoping for everything to look new or at least consistent. 

 

That is not an acceptable justification for total replacement of the wall cladding materials. Your commission has the ability to limit which materials may be replaced, and what they are replaced with, as long as they comply with the building commissioner's sole requirement that they be fireproof. 

 



Ward Hamilton 
Chairman
Melrose Historical Commission 

 

On Tue, Jan 18, 2022, 4:30 PM Ralph Slate <slater at alum.rpi.edu <mailto:slater at alum.rpi.edu> > wrote:

Is there a building code requirement in Massachusetts to prohibit wooden siding under certain circumstances? If not, then is it permissible for a local building commissioner to enact such a prohibition?

Ralph Slate
Springfield, MA

On 1/18/2022 3:42 PM, Michael J Tubin wrote:

We have been receiving more applicants that are being told by our new Building Commissioner he must consider fire rating when approving siding materials, based on his interpretation of MGL Chapter 40c section below.

 

Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent the ordinary maintenance, repair or replacement of any exterior architectural feature within an historic district which does not involve a change in design, material, color or the outward appearance thereof, nor to prevent landscaping with plants, trees or shrubs, nor construed to prevent the meeting of requirements certified by a duly authorized public officer to be necessary for public safety because of an unsafe or dangerous condition, nor construed to prevent any construction or alteration under a permit duly issued prior to the effective date of the applicable historic district ordinance or by-law.

 

Decision is based on setbacks and proximity to other properties, we are being required to allow property owners to use Hardi Plank cement siding. This is very frustrating when trying to keep historic materials on buildings. We are trying to push a compromise that will allow public view façades to be original materials and non-public view façades to be non-historic fire rated materials. Has anyone else run into this situation? Any materials other than Hardi Plank that would meet fire safety requirements?

 

Michael Tubin

Plymouth





_______________________________________________
MassHistPres mailing list
MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu <mailto:MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu> 
https://mailman.cs.umb.edu/listinfo/masshistpres

 

_______________________________________________
MassHistPres mailing list
MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu <mailto:MassHistPres at cs.umb.edu> 
https://mailman.cs.umb.edu/listinfo/masshistpres

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.cs.umb.edu/pipermail/masshistpres/attachments/20220120/04f17b42/attachment-0001.html>