MCCA Hotels: Aloft & Element | 371-401 D Street | South Boston

^ All of Midtown smelled strongly of smoke from that fire yesterday morning. Large apartment complexes really shouldn't be going up in flames with the semi-regularity we've seen in the last few months.
 
itchy said:
^ All of Midtown smelled strongly of smoke from that fire yesterday morning. Large apartment complexes really shouldn't be going up in flames with the semi-regularity we've seen in the last few months.
Click to expand...

Just to clarify, the first two times were unoccupied structures in the process of construction. Neither of those could possibly have had a working sprinkler system, as the framing was not even completely erected.
 
Equilibria said:
Just to clarify, the first two times were unoccupied structures in the process of construction. Neither of those could possibly have had a working sprinkler system, as the framing was not even completely erected.
Click to expand...

I understand drywall if fairly fire resistant, but what about the floors? Is there a fire resistant layer of some sort between the plywood and carpet/hardwood?
 
Cliff Clavin said:
I understand drywall if fairly fire resistant, but what about the floors? Is there a fire resistant layer of some sort between the plywood and carpet/hardwood?
Click to expand...

Dunno. Really, though, the issue is sprinklers. A building made entirely out of asbestos will still have enough flammable materials (carpets, papers, furniture, clothing, etc.) in close proximity to you to kill you with heat and smoke. Whether a frame is standing or not at the end of the fire makes very little difference.

FWIW, the World Trade Center towers collapsed because of burning office supplies, not impact or jet fuel fire. They were made of high-strength steel.
 
Equilibria said:
Whether a frame is standing or not at the end of the fire makes very little difference.
.
Click to expand...

Correct statement. As long as it was standing long enough to get occupants out. That's the whole point of rated enclosures etc. Egress of occupants out of the building. Beyond that, it can burn baby burn.

Sprinklers are life safety systems, not building protection.
98% of fires in fully sprinklered buildings are put out by 1 or 2 sprinklers.
I don't know what started the fire in new jersey, but it sounds like something pretty major and flammable must have been involved, not a random cigarette and a trash can.
 
Equilibria said:
Just to clarify, the first two times were unoccupied structures in the process of construction. Neither of those could possibly have had a working sprinkler system, as the framing was not even completely erected.
Click to expand...

Equilib -- no one is claiming that as of now that sprinklers would have helped with structures under construction

However, the most recent fire was a fully occupied structure -- and it had some sprinklers -- presumably to code -- but didn't do much good

My original point was that if the sprinklers as spec-ed by the code for an occupied structure need to be re-evaluated, then perhaps the idea of temporary sprinklers for an unoccupied structure might be worth evaluating as well
 
SeamusMcFly said:
Correct statement. As long as it was standing long enough to get occupants out. That's the whole point of rated enclosures etc. Egress of occupants out of the building. Beyond that, it can burn baby burn.

Sprinklers are life safety systems, not building protection.
98% of fires in fully sprinklered buildings are put out by 1 or 2 sprinklers.
I don't know what started the fire in new jersey, but it sounds like something pretty major and flammable must have been involved, not a random cigarette and a trash can.
Click to expand...

Equilib -- the fire marshal said it was accidental and caused by plumbing work -- I'm sure that NJ requires solder and may even still require hot lead
 
whighlander said:
My original point was that if the sprinklers as spec-ed by the code for an occupied structure need to be re-evaluated, then perhaps the idea of temporary sprinklers for an unoccupied structure might be worth evaluating as well
Click to expand...

No one died. The sprinkler system did its job. Sprinklers are not designed to protect the building beyond the amount of time it takes to evacuate it. Their sole purpose is to protect the occupants so they can evacuate safely while hopefully extinguishing whatever fire is below it. There is absolutely no reason to install temporary sprinklers for construction. You certainly couldn't do a wet system because the building isn't heated/insulated and a dry system doesn't make any sense because you'd have to construct the whole assembly anyway and at least have a heated valve enclosure.

Also to quell your fears, here in MA, MGL 148, Sec 26i requires all new or altered residential buildings with more than 4 dwelling units to have a fully automatic sprinkler system, regardless of construction type.

As an aside: Thrilled to see a discussion about fire protection engineering. Not something you get to talk about outside of work much. Haha. Anyway, this discussion is way off topic, these hotels are still U/C, doing fine as of now. Perhaps the fire protection/wood structure discussion should be moved.
 
Last edited:
BeeLine said:
Looking from W second S Boston
Click to expand...

Kind of generic comment for the Seaport / Innovation District and other places where there are limited reference points:

When someone posts a photo can they Please provide the location from which the photo was taken and the nearest major street and a direction [toward some established landmark]

Unfortunately Google Map has not kept up to the rate of change of streets, etc -- so Please do not use the names of the streets which only exist in the development plan -- provide some information about where you are and where you are looking relative to established streets

The use of SW corner of Seaport Landing Lane and such is not obvious -- but instead try to put it in the context of the established streets such as one block further away from the harbor than the corner of Northern Avenue and East Service Road looking toward the Courthouse will let the viewer make a mental image
 
Last edited:
datadyne007 said:
Also to quell your fears, here in MA, MGL 148, Sec 26i requires all new or altered residential buildings with more than 4 dwelling units to have a fully automatic sprinkler system, regardless of construction type.
Click to expand...

Wow. I didn't realize it was such a small number of units. So if someone renovates a brick rowhouse in the south end into 4 condos they need to install a sprinkler system? I don't recall ever seeing sprinklers in brownstones or row houses.
 
AmericanFolkLegend said:
Wow. I didn't realize it was such a small number of units. So if someone renovates a brick rowhouse in the south end into 4 condos they need to install a sprinkler system? I don't recall ever seeing sprinklers in brownstones or row houses.
Click to expand...

Yes, they would be required in a 4 unit building if a variance wasn't granted. They'd could apply for a variance, but I'd doubt its success.
 
Last edited:
Lived in a 4 fam converted to 4 condos in Medford a few years back. The investor who did the conversion went into foreclosure when the city informed him that he had done such an extensive reno that he had to install sprinklers. So yes, it makes sense that a row-house converted to 4 condos would need a sprinkler system.
 
Isn't this the complaint people have about 3-deckers? You can't build them anymore is the claim, because sprinklers make it cost-prohibitive. (I don't have an opinion.)

I've also heard if you have 4 units or more, one of them (presumably) has to be accessible by ramp (or, elevator) as a handicapped unit.
 
JohnAKeith said:
Isn't this the complaint people have about 3-deckers? You can't build them anymore is the claim, because sprinklers make it cost-prohibitive. (I don't have an opinion.)

I've also heard if you have 4 units or more, one of them (presumably) has to be accessible by ramp (or, elevator) as a handicapped unit.
Click to expand...

John -- I think that you have hit square-on the crux of challenge of meeting the Mayor's goal of 50,000 housing units for another 100,000 people

Sure you can always build the luxury stuff, and if you have a subsidizing entity you can always build the low-income stuff

But -- How are you going to build for the people who have incomes in the range of $50k to $150k -- particularly if they have kids? -- everywhere you turn you see impediments in the form of regulations
 
Yeah! Those darn life safety systems and disabled people!

And seriously, no, the code is specifically written for traditional triple deckers to be excluded because a triple decker is usually 3 units. If you split it into 4 or more, then you need life safety systems (fire alarm and fire protection)
 
datadyne007 said:
Yeah! Those darn life safety systems and disabled people!

And seriously, no, the code is specifically written for traditional triple deckers to be excluded because a triple decker is usually 3 units. If you split it into 4 or more, then you need life safety systems (fire alarm and fire protection)
Click to expand...

Data -- back when I was growing up, my father's sister and her husband owned an apartment house in East Cambridge just off Cambridge St.

The building was actually 2 Triple Deckers turned sideways to the street sharing a party wall with a small walk separating the house from the neighboring houses on each of the long ends -- one 1/2 was right on 6th St.; the other had a front yard behind a bakery

This was considered a 6 unit apartment in Cambridge -- and therefore subject to the rent control regulations -- i.e. it was nearly impossible to increase the rent to cover costs of things such as a new roof -- the result is that my father and I did a lot of the maintenance work for my aunt especially after my uncle died

Finally, Massachusetts saw the light and Cambridge rent control was abolished -- unfortunately my aunt barely lived to see the heavy hand of government lifted

All of the regulations need to be reviewed and many of them removed or replaced with ones specifying outcomes, rather than detailing the approach which must be followed

Then there is a chance that reasonably priced family housing will be able to be built to meet the demand
 
It's time for this discussion to leave this thread. All the fire safety stuff should be moved to its own thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top