Watch raw video of Gaithersburg fire from Chief Larry Gaddis, Bethesda Fire Department
Montgomery County, Maryland fire officials used Monday’s fire in Gaithersburg as a reminder of some of the problems firefighters and the public face with modern home construction techniques. While issues with lightweight construction are not news to those in the fire service, the people who live in the homes are often surprised to hear the concerns of firefighters.
Most of the people who live near the townhouse fire on Owens Glen Terrace that we contacted said they never heard of the term “lightweight construction”. They were all shocked to see the relatively rapid collapse of the roof and third floors of the burning home. Fire walls and firefighters kept the fire to the townhouse where it began.
Montgomery County Fire & Rescue Service spokesman Pete Piringer pointed out that the home construction techniques used in recent decades meet code and are generally sturdy. But under fire conditions, Piringer said the structural components tend to fail much more rapidly than post World War II homes. Piringer believes this is a safety issue for firefighters and the public.
While Pete Piringer and many others in the fire service believe a combination of working smoke alarms and automatic sprinkler systems will mitigate many of the problems associated with lightweight construction, the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) says that is only partially correct.
In an email, NAHB spokesperson Calli Schmidt tells STATter 911:
Calli Schmidt also pointed us to the report from the CDC on truss system failures familiar to firefighters.
On the issue of sprinklers, Schmidt directed me to the NAHB’s campaign Smoke Alarms Work (above). The home page carries the message sprinklers aren’t necessary:
The National Association of Home Builders encourages all home owners to check their own alarms regularly and to support community initiatives to install and maintain smoke alarms in all homes.
Is your city thinking about requiring fire sprinklers in all new homes?
Follow the links above to see why that’s not necessary.
Get the facts – smoke alarms do work…and save lives!
Click the link to read “Facts About Fire Sprinklers” and NAHB cites cost and maintenance as being behind its position on sprinklers:
While they should remain an option for home owners who choose them, fire sprinklers in single-family homes are expensive to install, can be difficult to maintain and do not represent a cost-effective safety improvement over smoke alarm systems. For that reason, NAHB does not support measures to mandate their use.
We have sent NAHB a number of columns, papers and reports on these topics written by fire service leaders (see links below). Included was the recent report by Prince William County, Virginia citing lightweight construction as a “major factor” in the April, 2007 death of Firefighter Kyle Wilson.
Spokesperson Schmidt said they would like more time for a detailed response to some of the issues raised in this material and by Pete Piringer. Schmidt says the NAHB code experts are currently in Palm Springs, CA testifying at hearings during the Codes Forum and she will try to make them available for questions on their return.
Related videos:
Too Close For Comfort (A February, 2004 look at home separation and lightweight construction.)
Manassas VFC’s raw video from 3-31-2006 fire at 8671 Trenton Chapel Way in Gainesville, VA (This is the second, multiple, single-family-dwelling fire on this street. The first, at 8659 Trenton Chapel Way on 1-6-2004, was featured in Too Close for Comfort, above.)
NIST home separation testing in July, 2004
A Tale of Two Fires or A Roof and Contents (A July, 2007 look at two house fires in Leesburg, VA)
Related Links (all forwarded to NAHB for comment)
Prince William County report into Kyle Wilson’s LODD
NIST fact sheet on house to house fire spread
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments
Of course the NAHB is going to say that lightweight construction is safe- by utilizing lightweight materials, they can build them faster and cheaper which contributes to their pockets. Obviously, no one from NAHB has ever had to fight a fire in this type of structure. Maybe they should ride along on a fire in one of these structures and see how fast and deadly a fire in one can be.
This is no big suprise, they have always been against sprinklers.It would be intresting to see their orignal stand on smoke detectors also. I recall that most all builders were dead set against smoke detectors when they were first proposed.
it is in the intrest of general contractors to install sprinklers as I have heard of the profit added on to the cost of installing the system.in some cases it almost doubles the installation price this is after the sprinkler contractor made his profit.possibley if jurstictions would give contractors a choice, sprinklers or full demisional constructions, no truss construction on residential
Several suburban Chicago builders are doing very well with one- and two-family homes being fire sprinked.
Can anyone elaborate whether or not that some Collier's Mansion syndrome may have contributed to problem as opposed to the construction type. Just heard this may be the case, and would really hate to see something blown out of proportion(again).
Since when did profit have to effect Firefighter Safety. If builders choose to use these "approved" Constuction methods they should be required to Sprinkler these types of dwellings. Using these methods is a proven for early structural collapse, how many more need to be killed or injured, just because of some Builders profit may suffer. It's time for people to wake up and realize this problem. As firefighters we deserve to go home after work also.
In New Jersey we have to mark commercial buildings with Truss/ Lightweight construction, why not residential. Maybe we should just let some ofthese "McMansions" just burn down, and see how the homeowner feels.
I have been to ICC hearings and all the home builders care for is their bottom line. Last time we were close to sprinklering hope we have better luck next time.
I have a different take on this video. The debate has turned to needing sprinklers. I would like to see a discussion on why it took six minutes or more to get water to the rear of the the dwelling. Initially you see the crews making a valiant effort inside the dwelling. Within two minutes of an effective water supply the fire is all but out. I think the discussion should turn to details like arrival times and availability of firefighting crews. The richest municipality in the state should have adequate numbers of apparatus in prime locations to afford a quick and timely response to any incident. In older cities an effective water supply is a main reason for quick knocks in the counties water is scarce. Before you put the burden on the homebuyer try using their taxes effectively instead of lining politicians pockets how about getting enough equipment and manpower along with an adequate water supply to protect the people that are paying for everything.
In response to the person saying it took so long to put water at the rear of the fire. If the crews were still working inside, water would never be applied from an exterior attack, which would basically put the crew inside in danger by pushing the fire back at them. These are tactical fire fighting methods, to an untrained eye it may seem like nothing is being done, but before the exterior attack is made, all efforts must be made to be sure the interior crew has left the structure. Nothing to do with the politicians and your tax dollars.
In response to the person saying I have an untrained eye. What are the procedures in your deoartment? While you may not want to apply water in the rear you certainly should establish a charged supply of water. You don't wait to get a water supply, having it ready and using it are two different things. If that is procedure in this jurisdiction maybe a policy change is in order.
While it may be fair to take NAHB to task on their position regarding residential sprinklers, it really isn't equitable to pick on them for lightweight construction.
NAHB, like all of us (I'm 35+ years fire service and code enforcement) respond to market factors. When the cost of buiding materials goes up due to scarcity and competition (you can't repeal or legislate the law of supply and demand, BTW)they have to find alternative means to produce and sell their product in a way that is affordable. It's a simple law of economics.
Now, let me throw some gasoline on the fire. How many fire fighters who complain about lightweight construction spend their days off-shift as contractors, homebuilders or laborers in the construction industry? If this really were a moral argument, shouldn't they (career, volunteer and IAFF) take a stand and say I'm not going to work in or support that industry? How many fire fighters choose to live in single family homes of lightweight construction? If you really are opposed to lightweight construction, buy a condo in a fire resistive building. Reagan used to callously say the "poor could vote with their feet," why can't fire fighters vote with their wallets?
While it may be fair to take NAHB to task on their position regarding residential sprinklers, it really isn't equitable to pick on them for lightweight construction.
NAHB, like all of us (I'm 35+ years fire service and code enforcement) respond to market factors. When the cost of buiding materials goes up due to scarcity and competition (you can't repeal or legislate the law of supply and demand, BTW)they have to find alternative means to produce and sell their product in a way that is affordable. It's a simple law of economics.
Now, let me throw some gasoline on the fire. How many fire fighters who complain about lightweight construction spend their days off-shift as contractors, homebuilders or laborers in the construction industry? If this really were a moral argument, shouldn't they (career, volunteer and IAFF) take a stand and say I'm not going to work in or support that industry? How many fire fighters choose to live in single family homes of lightweight construction? If you really are opposed to lightweight construction, buy a condo in a fire resistive building. Reagan used to callously say the "poor could vote with their feet," why can't fire fighters vote with their wallets?
To the person that said you should have a "charged supply of water" in the rear of the structure;this is true in the long run, but only after other things have been done on the fire ground. FF will always strech a hose line into the structure not to extinguish, but to perform a search for trapped occupants. This "SEARCH" takes place at every fire, reguardless if they are told every one is out!! there is no 2nd chance…If that crew can extinguish the fire at the same time GREAT! With this said additional hose line are taken into the building to provide additional protection to the FF/Trapped occupants…Do you have any idea how long this takes?!!…Do you have an idea of how many FF this takes?!…with limited FF on duty at each station (because of people not wanting taxes raised) these FF may have travel 10-15 mins to get there!!….Just as an FYI fire DOUBLES in INTENSITY every 30 seconds…..think about that….
If you are a FF and a memeber of the NAHB then YOU are a HIPOCRITE (a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.)…RESIDENTIAL Fire Sprinklers are designed to prevent flashover which if you are a FF then you would know this could help trapped occupants survive as well as protect FF during searches…Have you ever done a search?!…If you have again, you would know because you are a FF…that Flashover could occur without or vary litle warning and if your a witness to it your dead or burned (flash over occurs at about 1200 degrees…Thebest turnout gear can with stand 1500 degrees for 3 seconds…ouch…Maybe you are not a REAL FF looking out for friends…
Consumers can chhose to have a sprnkler system if they wish. We already have too many laws that drive the cost of goods up. 15 yrs in the fire service have taught me that you should read every incident and make a tactical decision based off risk benefit. If Fd's didnt charge heafd first into unoccupied structures with well advanced fire, maybe we could reduce the number of LODDs. Pre fire plans and knowing your territory will help you make theses decisions. Get out of the station and learn your territory.Don't place all the blame on not having sprinklers.