BUILDING
(STRUCTURAL) TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MINUTES
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 9, 2014
9:30 A.M. -11:22 A.M.
TELECONFERENCE/WEBINAR MEETING
FROM TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA
Public point of access:
Suite 90A, 1940 North Monroe Street, Tallahassee, Florida.
|
TAC/POC
MEMBERS AND OBJECTIVES |
|
STRUCTURAL
TAC MEMBERS PRESENT: (ALL MEMBERS PRESENT) James Schock :Chair
, CW Macomber, Steve Strawn, Craig Parrino, Daniel L. Lavrich, Do
Y. Kim, Jack Glenn, Jamie Gascon, Warner Chang, Harry “Rusty” Carroll,
David Compton |
|
MEETING
AGENDA |
|
|
OBJECTIVE |
REVIEW OF OBJECTIVES
WILL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING: Description of issue, discussion by TAC, public
comment, TAC action |
|
9:30 A.M. |
Welcome
and Opening, Roll Call Reviewed
and Approved of April 9, 2014 Meeting Agenda with an update to the agenda to address the
Declaratory statement items first. Reviewed
and Approved of the December 3, 2013 Meeting
Minutes |
|
2) |
To
consider and discuss the following Declaratory Statements: TAC
Actions: DS2014-023 by Glenn T. Williams, Esq.,
B.C.S. of Williams Law Firm A. Does the Storm Stoppers product as described
fall within the scope of the Florida Building Code, Existing Building? Answer: Answer is not possible. No specific project/level of
work was provided, and there are no specific facts and circumstances
provided. B. If the answer is yes, then what are the
specific Code provisions from the 2010 Florida Building Code,
Existing Building, that apply? Answer: See answer to question A. Interpretation No.2 A. What are the specific statutes, Code
provisions and laws that give the Florida Building Commission jurisdiction or
legal authority to regulate or approve any product for use on an Existing
Building AFTER the building has been constructed and received a certificate
of occupancy, when such product is not used or incorporated into the
permanent structure, nor attached with permanent anchors that penetrate into
the structure of the building's frame? Answer: Answer is not possible. Question is too general. B. Are wood structural panels (i.e. plywood)
as-described in the Florida Building Code, Residential, exempt from having to
comply with Florida Statutes Section 553.842(5)? Answer: Answer is not possible. This question
does not apply to the Petitioner’s product. C. If, in the opinion of the Florida Building
Commission, wood structural panels (i.e, plywood) are exempt
from Florida Statutes Section 553.842 (5), then would Storm Stoppers be entitled to receive the same exempt treatment as wood
structural panels assuming the Storm Stopper product is
equal to if not better than wood structural panels, for the temporary or
emergency protection of window or doors from wind and rain? Answer: Answer is not possible. This question does not apply
to the Petitioner’s product; and there are no specific facts and
circumstances provided. D. What is the Florida product approval number
for wood structural panels (i.e. plywood) showing that product was approved by the Florida Building
Commission? Answer: Answer is not possible. This question does not apply to the
Petitioner’s product. E. Since the Storm Stoppers product is equal to
if not better than wood structural panels Identified in
Section 1609.1.2 of the Florida Building Code, Residential, is Storm Stoppers entitled to receive the same treatment as wood structural
panels and not apply for a product approval number? Answer: Answer is not possible. This question does not apply to the
Petitioner’s product. F. Is Keddo Enterprises and Florida Building Commission recognized groups like the
IHPA, FLASH, FEMA and the IBHS permitted to
advertise or market wood structural panels (i.e. plywood) for "Wind-borne Debris Protection,
" as a "Shutter" and for "Hurricane
Protection" in Florida (even though plywood does not
have a Florida product approval number)? Answer: Answer is not possible. This question does not apply to the
Petitioner’s product. G. Is the Florida Building Commission violating Section 553.842(5) in their promotion of Table 1609.1.2 in the Florida Building Code,
Residential, by advertising wood structural panels (i.e. plywood) as "Wind-Borne Debris Protection" (at a time when plywood does not have a Florida product approval number and has not been
shown to pass the ASTM Large Missile Impact Test and the
Cyclic Pressure Differential Tests)? Answer: Answer is not
possible. This question does not apply to the Petitioner’s
product. H. Can Keddo Enterprises, Including home
improvement stores, advertise, sell, offer, market or distribute
plywood for wind-borne debris protection or hurricane protection, since
plywood is actually sold by home improvement stores
throughout Florida for that purpose both long before and during an approaching, hurricane? Answer: Answer is not possible. This question does not apply
to the Petitioner’s product, and it is not allowed to
comment on the conduct of another in a declaratory statement petition. I. Additionally, major home improvement
stores advertise or sell plywood in Florida as a Shutter, hurricane protection or as protection from wind-borne debris both long before and as a hurricane is approaching. For example, the home
improvement chain Lowe's has a YouTube video showing how to
board up windows with plywood (which consumers can purchase from Lowe's). See video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jCUrYY3lEk&feature=share&list=PLA3F904701785FEB8 Can Keddo Enterprises create a similar video
advertising or marketing plywood as a "shutter," "hurricane protection" or as
"protection from wind-borne debris", without violating Florida Statutes Section 553.842(5)? Answer: Answer is not possible. This question does not apply
to the Petitioner’s product, and it is not allowed to comment on the conduct
of another in a declaratory statement petition. Interpretation 3: Does the Storm Stoppers product fall outside the scope of Rule
61G20-3.001, State Product Approval Program? Answer: The answer is “Yes”. The product in question
is a proposed alternative to the Wood Structural Panels (prescriptive
specification method for protection of opening) as specified in Section R 301.2.1.2,
Exception, of the Florida Building Code “FBC”,
Residential. As per Section 104.11 of the Florida Building
Code, Building, an alternative method of construction to that prescribed in
the FBC is subject to review and approval by the local building official,
when such alternative is substantiated to be equivalent of that prescribed in
the FBC in quality, strength, effectiveness, durability and
safety. Therefore, the Florida Building Commission has no
authority to approve said alternate as part of the State Product Approval
Program. DS2014-035 by Scott E. Rudacille,
Esq. of Blalock Walters, P.A. Answer: The
project would not be classified as “Substantial Structural Damage” and would
be reviewed under 807.4. Question
2: If an alteration project is deemed
to be Substantial Structural Damage under FBC Existing Building Section 202,
is it automatically deemed to also be Substantial Damage for flood design
requirements, regardless of whether the project meets the definitions of
Substantial Damage and Substantial Improvement in FBC Section1612.2 (ie. The
“50% Rule”)?” Answer: The answer is no. Regardless of the
impact to the roof system, flood design requirements for new construction are
only triggered if the project exceeds the “50% Rule”, as described in the
definition of Substantial Damage and Substantial Improvement in FBC Section
1612.2. DS2014-037 by Wayne R. Thorne, Building
Official of Longboat Key Building Department Question 1: To
the question” As it relates to noncompliant flood elevation
buildings, is it the intent of the Florida Building Code, Building Section
3109.1.1 exception to prevent any repairs and require the building to become
compliant by elevating them on new foundations, relocating the building, or
rebuild the buildings at the minimum required elevation?”, the
answer is not possible. This question is general and falls
outside the scope of the declaratory statement process. Question 2: To
the question” As it relates to the definitions of repair, would sealing of
fractures and fissures be considered a repair or modification?”, the answer
is repair. The work in question is considered patching/restoration
of building elements for the purpose of maintaining such elements in good
condition and thus falls within the scope of “Repair” as defined in Section
202 of the Florida Building Code, Existing Building. Question 3: To
the question” As it relates to the definitions of repair, would cleaning of
corroded reinforcements
and applying concrete patching or filling the spalled areas be
considered a repair or modification?”, ?”, the answer
is repair. The work in question is considered patching/restoration
of building elements for the purpose of maintaining such elements in good
condition and thus falls within the scope of “Repair” as defined in Section
202 of the Florida Building Code, Existing Building. Question 4: To
the question” As it relates to the definitions of repair, would replacement
of reinforcements or ties, or realignment of sprung reinforcements, be
considered repair or modification?”, the answer is
repair. The work in question is considered patching/restoration of
building elements for the purpose of maintaining such elements in good
condition and thus falls within the scope of “Repair” as defined in Section
202 of the Florida Building Code, Existing Building. Question 5: Would
Florida Building Code, Building Section 3109.1.1 exception have the same requirements
if the building was built as compliant with a pile foundation and for the
flood elevation? ”, Answer is not possible. This question
falls outside the scope of the project in question. |
|
3) |
To
accepted interim reports on the following research projects 1) Investigation of fastening of wood structural panels for
opening protection Dr.
Forrest Masters presented the findings on their research of structural panels
and provided a report of their findings. The Structural TAC voted
unanimously to approve this report provided by Dr. Forrest Masters 2) Full scale wind load testing of aluminum screen
enclosures Dr.
Forrest Masters presented the findings of wind load testing of aluminum
screen enclosures. The Structural TAC voted unanimously to approve
this report provided by Dr. Forrest Masters 3) Feasibility study for in-home storm shelters in Florida
residential homes. Dr.
David Prevatt provided the University of Florida findings on
in-home storm shelters to the committee. The Structural TAC voted
unanimously to approve this report provided by Dr. David Prevatt |
|
4) |
No
other business |
|
5) |
Adjourned at 11:22 |
STAFF
CONTACTS: Joe Bigelow, Planning Analyst joe.bigelow@myfloridalicense.com
(850) 717-1829 or Mo
Madani, Manager mo.madani@myfloridalicense.com
Teleconference
Process and Etiquette URL:
Note: This document is available to any
person requiring materials in alternate format upon request. Contact the Department of Business and Professional Regulation,
Suite 90, 1940 N. Monroe, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 or call 850-487-1824.