Public Meeting Notice  BBRS Residential Code Subcommittee Meeting- 6.4.26

Microsoft Teams meeting link and dial-in number

Microsoft Teams Meeting Link

Meeting ID: 242 733 156 966 5 

Passcode: aP2jX6UP 

Need help? | System reference 

Dial in to the meeting 

Meeting phone number:+1 857-327-9245,,661746473# United States, Boston

Find a local number 

Phone conference ID: 661 746 473# 

In accordance with the provisions of G.L. c. 30A § 20, notice is hereby given that the Board of Building Regulations and Standards 11^th Edition Residential Code Subcommittee will be convening a regular meeting. 

If you need reasonable accommodation to participate in the meeting, please reach out to Cheryl Yebba at 617- 701-8711. The Agency will make best efforts to accommodate requests received in a timely manner.

In accordance with the provisions of G.L. c. 30A § 20, the Board of Building Regulations and Standards Residential Code Committee convened a regular monthly meeting on:

Microsoft Teams Meeting June 4^th, 2026

The topics shown below were discussed at the aforementioned meeting: 9:08 AM Chair David Riquinha called the open meeting to order 

Informational note: All votes were taken by roll call whereby each member was called on to record their vote. Where each member voted in favor, the vote will be reported as unanimous.

Committee Members Present:

• David Riquinha, Chair
• Becca Edson
• Reade Milne
• Len Morse-Fortier
• Ross Seavey

Committee Members Absent:

• Todd Cantor
• Jason Ferschke
• Greg Gagnon
• David Silveira

DOL Staff Present:

• Tammy Gropman, Executive Director
• Charles Kilb, Senior Board Counsel
• Andrew Chase, Associate Executive Director

Acknowledged Public Attendees:

• Rebecca Quinn

1. Discussed Meeting Minutes: 
   1. April 23^rd, 2026, Meeting Minutes – It was noted that the subcommittee had approved the April 23^rd, 2026, minutes at the previous meeting. No action taken.
2. Reviewed - Front End Amendments
   1. R313.2/ Appendix BO Front End Amendments for Code Change Proposal submitted by T. Cantor.
   2. Executive Director Tammy Gropman noted the proposal was approved and that a front-end amendment document was still needed. As proponent Todd Cantor was not present, members discussed tabling the matter to the following meeting. Ross Seavey motioned to table the front-end amendment, seconded by Reade Milne. A roll call vote was held, none opposed, none abstained. Motion passed unanimously. 
3. Reviewed, Discussed, & Voted IRC and 780 CMR 51.00 Chapter Reviews 
   1. 2024 IRC Appendix NB (AT)
      1. Members reviewed Appendix NB governing Solar-Ready Provisions. Discussion centered primarily on Massachusetts Amendment Exception 3 to Section NB103.1, which exempts certain previously designed construction documents from complying with solar-ready zone requirements. Becca Edson explained that the exception had been carried forward from prior editions and effectively allowed projects designed before site-specific review to avoid compliance with solar-ready requirements. Members discussed whether this undermined the intent of the appendix, which is to ensure that new homes are capable of accommodating future photovoltaic installations where site conditions permit. Several members observed that solar-ready construction generally imposes minimal cost because it primarily involves reserving roof area and installing conduit pathways rather than requiring solar panels themselves. Becca Edson motioned to adopt Appendix NC unamended, seconded by Reade Milne. Becca Edson rescinded her motion to allow for further discussion.
      2. Members also reviewed Exception 2 concerning the 70 percent shading threshold and discussed whether retaining an objective percentage standard was preferable to relying on subjective determinations of “partial” or “full” shading. The committee generally acknowledged the value of objective criteria but noted enforcement difficulties associated with determining actual shading percentages in the field. Discussion then expanded to Section NB103.3 and references to the International Fire Code (IFC) and 527 CMR. Members noted ongoing concerns regarding solar setback requirements, signposting, and whether references to fire code provisions should instead be incorporated directly into the building code. 
      3. Board Counsel Charles Kilb explained that separate solar setbacks had been drafted by a special subcommittee after promulgation of the 10th Edition and had been voted on by the BBRS for the formal regulation process, which was still ongoing.  He suggested the subcommittee be mindful of these amendments going forward to avoid duplicative work. 
      4. Reade Milne motioned to table Appendix NB for review at the following meeting, seconded by Becca Edson. A roll call vote was held, none opposed, none abstained. Motion passed unanimously. 
   2. 2024 IRC Chapter 4
      1. Section R404.1.7 – Members reviewed Section R404.1.7 governing foundation wall backfilling and bracing. Discussion focused on language requiring walls to be “sufficiently braced” before backfilling. Len Morse described examples of foundation wall failures resulting from premature backfilling, including a severe injury case involving a collapsed foundation wall. Members debated whether the term “sufficiently” created ambiguity because compliance could only be judged after a wall either failed or survived. Several members expressed concern that contractors frequently backfill walls before floor framing is installed because it simplifies construction operations. After extensive discussion, the committee agreed that requiring walls simply to be “braced” provided clearer direction than requiring them to be “sufficiently braced.” Becca Edson motioned to adopt the 2024 IRC language with a Massachusetts amendment deleting the word “sufficiently”, seconded by Len Morse-Fortier. A roll call vote was held, none opposed, none abstained. Motion passed unanimously. 
      2. Section R406.2.1 – Members reviewed an existing Massachusetts amendment requiring foundation tie holes to be patched with hydraulic cement. Several participants questioned whether the amendment remained necessary, noting that modern waterproofing systems and coatings generally provide equivalent or superior protection. Members characterized the provision as potentially redundant and lacking a clear enforcement benefit. Becca Edson motioned to adopt the 2024 IRC language without modification, seconded by Reade Milne. A roll call vote was held, none opposed, none abstained. Motion passed unanimously.
      3. Section R408.7 – Members reviewed Section R408.7 and discussed the previous Massachusetts deletion of an exception associated with FEMA Technical Bulletin 11 regarding below-grade crawl spaces in flood hazard areas. Rebecca Quinn explained that FEMA guidance requires specific local implementation provisions and that Massachusetts had previously removed the exception because below-grade crawl spaces can create instability when flooded. Reade Milne motioned to strike the exception in R408.7 for FEMA TB 11, seconded by Becca Edson. A roll call vote was held, none opposed, none abstained. Motion passed unanimously.
   3. 2024 IRC Chapter 6
      1. Section R602.10 – Members reviewed wall bracing provisions and Massachusetts amendments affecting bracing requirements for unconditioned single-story spaces less than 600 square feet. Discussion focused on whether the existing Massachusetts exception remained necessary. Several members concluded that the exception was highly specific and difficult to justify, particularly because alternative engineering methods remained available when prescriptive provisions were not suitable. Ross Seavey motioned to adopt 2024 IRC R602.10 unamended, seconded by Becca Edson. A roll call vote was held, none opposed, none abstained. Motion passed unanimously.
      2. Section R602.10.2.2.1 – Members reviewed a Massachusetts amendment deleting one of the IRC exceptions. Discussion centered on the absence of documented rationale for the deletion and the broader objective of minimizing unnecessary state amendments. Becca Edson motioned to adopt 2024 IRC R602.10.2.2.1 without amendment, seconded by Reade Milne. A roll call vote was held, none opposed, none abstained. Motion passed unanimously.
      3. Sections R602.10.3, R602.10.4, R602.10.5, and R602.10.10 – Members conducted an extensive discussion regarding Massachusetts amendments that historically removed seismic references from residential wall bracing provisions. Len Morse and others noted that Massachusetts residential design is generally governed by wind loading rather than seismic loading and that previous code editions had intentionally simplified the IRC by removing seismic provisions not typically applicable in the Commonwealth. Ross Seavey motioned to table discussion of R602.10.3 until the following meeting, seconded by Reade Milne. A roll call vote was held, none opposed, none abstained. Motion passed unanimously.
      4. Members debated whether the amendments should be revisited or referred to a future Structural subcommittee but concluded that retaining the existing Massachusetts approach was appropriate pending any future structural review. Following discussion, Chair Riquinha suggested returning to review R602.10.3. Len Morse-Fortier motioned to carry forward the 10th Edition amendments for Sections R602.10.3, seconded by Becca Edson. A roll call vote was held, none opposed, none abstained. Motion passed unanimously.
      5. Becca Edson motioned to adopt R602.10.4 with 10^th edition amendments, seconded by Len Morse-Fortier. A roll call vote was held, none opposed, none abstained. Motion passed unanimously.
      6. Members reviewed Section R602.10.5, which contains bracing requirement tables. Discussion focused on revisions made to the 2024 IRC tables and the difficulty of directly comparing them to the existing Massachusetts amendments. Members discussed whether the section would benefit from future review by the Structural Subcommittee because of the technical nature of the bracing provisions. 
      7. Members observed that the Massachusetts amendments primarily remove seismic design category references while retaining wind-based design requirements. Further discussion noted that the principal difference between the IRC and the Massachusetts amendment was the removal of seismic-related provisions and columns from the tables. Members concluded that the historical purpose of the amendment remained consistent with prior committee discussions regarding the exclusion of residential seismic requirements in Massachusetts.
      8. Len Morse-Fortier motioned to carry forward the 10th Edition amended language of R602.10.5, seconded by Becca Edson. A roll call vote was held, none opposed, Reade Milne abstained. Motion passed with majority. 
      9. Members reviewed Section R602.10.10 and noted that the discussion was consistent with earlier reviews of Sections R602.10.3 through R602.10.5. Becca Edson motioned to carry forward 10^th Edition amended language of R602.10.10, seconded by Len Morse-Fortier. A roll call vote was held, none opposed, none abstained. Motion passed unanimously.  
      10. Section R603.9.5 – Members reviewed Section R603.9.5 and discussed prior Massachusetts deletions of seismic requirements affecting masonry veneer and related construction. Discussion again focused on the longstanding Massachusetts practice of removing residential seismic provisions because wind loading generally governs one- and two-family dwelling design. Members acknowledged that any future structural review could revisit the issue. Becca Edson motioned to carry forward 10th Edition amended language of R603.9.5, seconded by Len Morse-Fortier. A roll call vote was held, none opposed, none abstained. Motion passed unanimously.
      11. Section R606.2.8 – Members reviewed Section R606.2.8 and related masonry provisions. Discussion focused on the continued removal of masonry provisions tied to seismic design categories. Consistent with prior discussions regarding residential seismic requirements, members concluded that the existing Massachusetts amendments should remain in place. Becca Edson motioned to carry forward 10th Edition amended language of R606.2.8, seconded by Len Morse-Fortier. A roll call vote was held, none opposed, none abstained. Motion passed unanimously.
      12. Section 606.11, Appendices BB and CH – Reade Milne motioned to table the remaining agenda items to the next meeting, seconded by Len Morse-Fortier. A roll call vote was held, none opposed, none abstained. Motion passed unanimously.
4. Discuss matters not reasonably anticipated 48 hours in advance of the meeting
   1. No matters were discussed. 
5. Adjournment – The next meeting is scheduled for June 18^th, 2026
   1. Reade Milne motioned to adjourn, seconded by Len Morse-Fortier. A roll call vote was held, none opposed, none abstained. Motion passed unanimously.
   2. Meeting adjourned at 11:30 AM.

Items Relied Upon

• Meeting Agenda
• Meeting Minutes
• Code Change Proposal
• 2024 IRC

It is anticipated that the topics shown below will be discussed at the aforementioned meeting: 

1. ReviewMinutes of the following meetings: 
   1. Residential Code Subcommittee April 23, 2026
2. Review/Discuss/Vote Front End Amendments for below
   1. R313.2/ Appendix BO Front End Amendments for Code Change Proposal submitted by T. Cantor  
3. Review/Discuss/ Vote IRC and 780 CMR 51.00 Chapter Reviews 
   1. 2024 IRC Appendix NB (AT)
   2. 2024 IRC Chapter 4
   3. 2024 IRC Chapter 6
   4. 2024 IRC Appendix BB
   5. 2024 IRC Appendix CH
4. Discuss matters not reasonably anticipated by the chair, 48 hours in advance of the meeting

Adjournment – the next scheduled meeting is June 15, 2026