I have seen a number of posts over the years that ask for advice and include the statement “code is not an issue” or “no local codes apply.” I was wondering if any of the vast majority of folks who work where codes do apply often run into situations where problems arise because some aspect of a really custom job is not addressed by local code. I’m not talking about violations of code, but rather unique features dreamed up by designers or architects. Is it as simple as getting an engineer to sign off on a drawing, or does it get more involved? Have you had to alter the scope of a project just because an official couldn’t find a specific reference in his book?
My question is theoretical, but based on my own experience of having to jump through a few hoops to do something out of the ordinary in my own home (I ultimately got what I wanted done, legally).
Replies
I'm not exactly sure what your question is, or what you're looking for. But I can give a couple of examples of what I've run into.
Ran into a town once that only allowed 500PSI of tension or compression in any framing member, regardless of its published design values. That kicked a lot of truss designs out that actually worked fine.
Another town required all framing of any sort to be 16" O.C. That tended to make trusses a lot more expensive. (40 to 50%)
A county near here requires hip frames we build to be beveled. No real reason - They just thought it was a good idea.
All 3 of these examples were dreamed up by some nut job with too much time on their hands. None of them make any sense. But they sure cause a lot of headaches.
I married the first man I ever kissed. When I tell my children that, they just about throw up. [Barbara Bush]
Sorry I wasn't more clear- I was referring more to design "features". My question was aimed at satisfying my own curiosity about whether codes, when narrowly applied, have a tendency to stifle design creativity, especially in new, truly one of a kind custom homes.
For example, in my area, a retired, bachelor fireman wanted to add a brass fire pole from his bedroom to his garage- where he kept a restored 1920's firetruck (a little strange, but what the hey). I'm not sure if he ever got it, but the local official didn't want to allow it because he couldn't find any reference specifically allowing it.
In my own case, I wanted a glass plate in the floor to allow a view of an interesting element within the original foundation of the house (old house). I was only able to do it with stamped engineer's drawings and all kinds of data on the strength of the glass, etc. Even though it was WAY over engineered, the official was reluctant to sign off.
=====Zippy=====
Often times unique or unaddressed areas that give the inspector the willies can be implemented under the "alternative methods" section of the code.
The bedroom-to-garage brass pole could have caused problems in isolating the garage from the living space of the house.
The glass floor should not have been a problem.
single state wide code ( now using the IBC ) with RI amendments..
anything not addressed by code , the BI can ask that it be overbuilt to something he/she is comfortable with .. or tell you to get it engineered and stamped...
sometimes if I show him my calculations ( printed right out on the plans) he accepts them , especially if there are tables to subtantiate..
" the alternative methods" usually need a stamp..
Our building code is pretty uniform through out the state (midwest area). I find things not addressed by code get way over-designed. example, I have a job that involves a 2-1/2" segment on a force main line we are running (3500' line). This is the type where homeowners have little grinder pumps to push effluent out instead of a gravity system due to topography. 2-1/2" is a plumbers size, so no gasketed fittings available, only solvent weld. Only here you cannot bury solvent weld fittings by code. So we have a 48" x 8' deep concrete manhole with 400 lb. cast iron lid for observation of this joint. Cost $3000
remodeler
In this month's FHB, the article on crawl spaces:
Code requires vented crawl spaces, but there are times when venting warm, moist air into a cool crawl space (thereby condensing out the moisture onto the cool crawlspace surfaces) can cause moiture/mold issues.
Maybe the code will have to be improved here.
Or maybe in new construction crawl spaces can be designed into the 'conditioned space' to avoid non-venting it to be a violation.
On another contentious topic:
venting of roof
Some construction methods, like SIPs, can not be 'vented' without having to build a second 'roof' over it. The benefit of vented roof (prevent escaping household air from warming the roof skin and creating ice dams) is naturally avoided with SIP construction, but does the code specifically allow for non-vented roofs?
The shingle life benefit of roof venting has been contested here before, sometimes with data.
Norm