Montana Judge Invalidates Fire-Resistant Roof Ordinance

June 4, 2013

  • June 4, 2013 at 3:00 pm
    jim says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Most likely there’s no valid ordinance, either, that mandates firefighters climb on to a burning wood roof…it could be fatal. The judge obviously overlooked the law’s intent….to save both property and lives.

  • June 4, 2013 at 6:15 pm
    Huh! says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    If the homeowner is replacing a few shingles or even a small portion of the roof, there should not have been a problem; however, replacing an entire roof would certainly bring current building codes into play. There is too little information to make a proper judgment call.

  • July 2, 2013 at 7:21 pm
    Jean SmilingCoyote says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    I am first reading this soon after a wildfire in and around Yarnell, Arizona killed 19 Hotshots in their last-resort fire shelters, the greatest single loss of firefighters’ lives in many years. Fire-resistant exterior materials for buildings have been available for decades, and don’t have to make you look like you’re living inside a rock. I don’t think firefighters should have to be put at high risk of death to save buildings. The debate about laws requiring fire-resistant building exteriors has been raging for decades in many places. I am sick to death of all the legal-type objections. Cut this Gordian Knot already! I know brush clearance is also part of fire protection, but since burning embers can travel long distances on high winds, we must require fire-resistant building exteriors.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*