Articles

We have two neighbors with shake roofs and cannot for the life of me figure out why they have not been replaced

I can probably relate, we had put off replacing our roof because it was 18,000 to replace, I didn't have that laying around, we had to save for 3 years and, finish out with a credit card to have it replaced. Now it is a class "A" 40year roof. But, it took me a long, long time to diligently save for it. And, that was the cheapest qoute we got. The other 2 where 19,700 and 21,000. So I can understand why people don't replace it right away, hard enough nowadays to put food on the table.

Those who might have the shake roof system need to be informed. These shingles can be made to flame resistant.

I will try to do some investigating today and get back to you with the facts. I am basing my opinion on years past when graphite in powder form was available. We have performed this service in years past. There are products out there to serve as vehicle that do in fact help make a substrate fire resistant.

I'll get back to ya...

Ok, as I thought, there is a product specifically designed to meet this challenge. Someone should contact the building department to find out if "TREATED" wooden shingles are acceptable. The County Board of Supervisors office may also be a good source to contact especially if this new ordinance might be causing financial distress for the property owners.

When I get a minute this afternoon, I will contact this manufacturer and gain more understanding on the matter and what the costs are both for purchasing and application...

www.nyfs.com/store.asp?pid=13520

Check it out...

Skyforest - I loved that you guys actually saved for the cost of replacement - three years - what a great goal to have!

I understand the roofing ordinance - and fully support it. But the "vegetation" rules are awfully vague - "green trees & bushes" - are we going to receive more clarification on this? Or should we all start pulling out our lilacs, roses, and flower beds now? Michael - is there any further word to come?

A day late and a dollar short again. Another half step. Pulling shake roofs is a good move but not nearly enough. We’ve known they are dangerous forever. Think how long it took to ban them. Then think of the hazardous building codes still allowed and how long it will take to ‘retrofit’ them. Boxed eaves should have been required and shake roofs banned long ago. There are most certainly other code changes that should be invoked now to save lives and property in the future. Short term it might increase the cost of homes. Longer term it would likely be less expensive because fewer retrofits would be required and less fire damage would result.

You’re right Gabby. The green rules seem too ambiguous to be effectively enforced. They likely know what they want but haven’t expressed it well enough for uniform understanding and compliance let alone equal enforcement. It could be that the vagueness is intentional: an attempt to give us some latitude in planting. Different plants pose different hazards because they burn at different rates, heights and temperatures. Rigid spacing requirements for plants would have to be written to accommodate the most hazardous plants, like manzanita, which would preclude planting other plants of about the same size but which are much less dangerous.

We called in an expert to evaluate how well our property stood up to the new codes. We thought it was in pretty good shape so we were surprised to learn that a Snowball Bush, a Lilac and a Mock Orange may have to go.

The chimney rules on the other hand are apparently carved in concrete. You must have chimney clearance if you have a chimney irrespective of whether it uses only gas or has no fireplace and is simply decorative. I can live with that, though it will cost us to trim trees not really in danger.

Boxed eaves
What are these?

What about our shrubs? Do we have to get rid of them too?