Fire on Cameron - another wood construction up in flames

[msbreezie]

Once again an apartment/condo goes up in flames and I am angry that this city allows building to continue to be built with wood framing. I see more stuff going up all the time.
If you are put out on the street due to a fire, you still must pay your mortgage. IF you have insurance they will pay your living costs but not your condo/strata fees while you are homeless.
Last summer friends lost their condo and now I hear about the families today on Cameron.
The city should be held accountable.
The people at Watersedge (?) last summer had pleaded with the city and warned them that building two was too close and there wouldn't be room for a fire truck to get access but smart old city hall allowed the construction, a roofer made a mistake and many are now homeless.
I understand there is only one building that is concrete and it is downtown by the water.
So many people lost their homes in 2003 but the city didn't learn from their mistakes. It breaks my heart as there will be more families who will have to endure this nightmare too.

https://www.castanet.net/news/Kelowna/2 ... family-out

[TMBOkanagan]

Once again an apartment/condo goes up in flames and I am angry that this city allows building to continue to be built with wood framing. I see more stuff going up all the time.
If you are put out on the street due to a fire, you still must pay your mortgage. IF you have insurance they will pay your living costs but not your condo/strata fees while you are homeless.
Last summer friends lost their condo and now I hear about the families today on Cameron.
The city should be held accountable.
The people at Watersedge (?) last summer had pleaded with the city and warned them that building two was too close and there wouldn't be room for a fire truck to get access but smart old city hall allowed the construction, a roofer made a mistake and many are now homeless.
I understand there is only one building that is concrete and it is downtown by the water.
So many people lost their homes in 2003 but the city didn't learn from their mistakes. It breaks my heart as there will be more families who will have to endure this nightmare too.

I agree that it is disheartening to see families lose their homes from a fire. However, the blame is not with the City, as building codes are regulated by the Provincial BC Building Code. If you wish to ban wood frame - you should sent your comments to the province.

[zerograv]

lol what a joke. How many wood framed buildings are there? and how many burn down?.....think that shows they are very safe. You can't blame the buildings construction on others' stupidity.

[seewood]

Once again an apartment/condo goes up in flames and I am angry that this city allows building to continue to be built with wood framing. I see more stuff going up all the time.

Have an alternative in mind?
Being an ex fire guy, the fuel load inside a room really gets the fire going, not so much the dry walled covered walls.
If one would want to ban wood framed buildings, how about banning cigarettes, they more often than not start the fire in the first place plus the huge cost on the medical system. latest fire had a witness say a shrub was burning out front...any idea how that would have started?? cigarette but off an upper balcony perhaps?

Not to mention the number of destructive forest, brush fires started by cigarette butts..

[johnny24]

Once again an apartment/condo goes up in flames and I am angry that this city allows building to continue to be built with wood framing. I see more stuff going up all the time.
If you are put out on the street due to a fire, you still must pay your mortgage. IF you have insurance they will pay your living costs but not your condo/strata fees while you are homeless.
Last summer friends lost their condo and now I hear about the families today on Cameron.
The city should be held accountable.
The people at Watersedge (?) last summer had pleaded with the city and warned them that building two was too close and there wouldn't be room for a fire truck to get access but smart old city hall allowed the construction, a roofer made a mistake and many are now homeless.
I understand there is only one building that is concrete and it is downtown by the water.
So many people lost their homes in 2003 but the city didn't learn from their mistakes. It breaks my heart as there will be more families who will have to endure this nightmare too.

Seems they have learned from 2003 because it hasn't happened in the 14 years since. You propose they build houses from concrete and steel also? Very expensive. Perhaps you should share your thoughts with the lumber industry.

[youjustcomplain]

Almost every single house is wood framed. Almost every single multi family building up to 4 stories is wood framed. Wood is flamable, yes, but it's always covered by drywall which has a fire rating. For multi family buildings, there are also concrete fire walls giving separation between units to reduce fire spread.

What is the alternative? Make them all steel and concrete? If you think the price of housing is expensive now, just imagine what it would look like if we used very expensive materials. Besides, for structure fires, if the steel or concrete structure survived, it would be an empty shell as the contents and the rest of the structure would still burn or melt away. Either way, the families are out of the house until rebuilt.

Blaming the city for allowing wood framing is too short sighted.

Besides, wasn't the cameron rd fire started in a bush out front of the house? I dunno about everyone else, but my bushes have about 16 inches of snow on them. they couldn't burn if they wanted out; not without motive anyhow.

[alanjh595]

Maybe it's time to legislate mandatory sprinklers?

[seewood]

Maybe it's time to legislate mandatory sprinklers

Not a bad idea.
In any new construction in W. Van for instance, sprinklers are mandatory. They do work. Seen them stop a fire at a school.

Just need a larger diameter water line to the structure.

[cv23]

Maybe it's time to legislate mandatory sprinklers?

The Water's Edge 2 building that burnt as well as the original Water's Edge building both were fully sprinklered. Unfortunately the system was not yet turned on in building #2 when it caught fire due to a workers negligence and the system in building #1 was obviously woefully inadequate for the circumstances. The system in building #1 was not only in compliance with current codes but exceeded current standards.
Building fires are rare in comparison to the amount of structures built each year and the vast majority of those fires are human caused. Hard to blame the buildings construction when it is the inhabitants who are the cause in most fires.

PS: Sprinkler systems are already mandatory in most large buildings in Kelowna and that includes the decks

[UhHuhYeahSure]

Most fire damage and fire related deaths in Canada are caused by burning of the contents of a structure and not the structure itself.

Having lived in Latin America where nearly all buildings are built of concrete, not so much for fire but for material availability and termites, I've seen far more house/building fires with smoke and flames from burning contents than fires here where houses are built of wood and lined with nonburnable wall board.

Buildings under construction and torched by morons or insurance lightning is a different story.

[alanjh595]

PS: Sprinkler systems are already mandatory in most large buildings in Kelowna and that includes the decks

Make it part of ALL residential buildings as well. Houses, garages, and decks. Maybe insurance companies will gil everyone a discount for having them installed?

[youjustcomplain]

Make it part of ALL residential buildings as well. Houses, garages, and decks. Maybe insurance companies will gil everyone a discount for having them installed?

Adding to the cost of single occupancy homes is not a solution most would get behind. You're talking about adding to the cost of every new home which is high enough for most, as is.

Would insurance companies give a discount? Maybe. But consider that whether the sprinkler system is wet or dry, in the event of a fire, a lot of water will be released which causes a lot of damage. Also consider that both systems can fail. A dry system typically requires a compressor that needs to continue to work during a power outage. So, to have that system in place, you'd need a generator aswell? $$$ start adding up.

[alanjh595]

Not to compare the cost of a sprinkler system in wood frame to the cost of concrete or brick building. Even building with concrete does not eliminate the combustibility of the contents.

[youjustcomplain]

Noe compare the cost of a sprinkler system in wood frame to the cost of concrete or brick building. Even building with concrete does not eliminate the combustibility of the contents.

Oh, make no mistake, I don't disagree on the merits of a sprinkler system. I just don't agree that it should be part of the building code.

Sprinkler systems save lives and often put a fire out before fire crews arrive. If it doesn't extinguish the fire, they may help preserve a livable environment for occupants to escape.

I don't actually know the cost of a concrete framed structure, but I'd guess someone here would have a sense of it. I don't know it's considerably more costly than a type 5 wood frame. And you're right. The contents are a bigger issue for occupants than the structure is as the burning contents are the ones responsible for the toxic smokes.

[alanjh595]

Noe compare the cost of a sprinkler system in wood frame to the cost of concrete or brick building. Even building with concrete does not eliminate the combustibility of the contents.

Oh, make no mistake, I don't disagree on the merits of a sprinkler system. I just don't agree that it should be part of the building code.

Sprinkler systems save lives and often put a fire out before fire crews arrive. If it doesn't extinguish the fire, they may help preserve a livable environment for occupants to escape.

I don't actually know the cost of a concrete framed structure, but I'd guess someone here would have a sense of it. I don't know it's considerably more costly than a type 5 wood frame. And you're right. The contents are a bigger issue for occupants than the structure is as the burning contents are the ones responsible for the toxic smokes.

AND lives are worth more than contents, that is why I suggested a price break on fire insurance for those that have sprinklers.