I recently was awarded a bid to supply a homeowner/architect EPS wall panels manufactured in Canada for an addition to his home. When the builder went to get a building permit, he was informed that the ppnels could not be used because they were not made out of Hem-Fir #2 or better. The township has a specific ordinance stating all houses will be framed using #2 Hem-Firl. No Spuce or Pine or anything with a S-P-F stamp. The panels incorporate 2×6 I-joist instead of 2×6 studs, and have EPS foam profiled to fit inbetween. The manufacturer has presented documentation stating that the I-joist use #1 Pine with 16% or less moisture content. This is actually superior to Hem-Fir and should be permitted. I am currnetly getting a structural engineer to review the plans and seal it. Has anyone else run in to this type of thing. I am located in Eastern Pa. outside of Phila.
John
Nascor Building Systems of Pa.
Replies
I'm near Philly, which township is this?
The township is Easttown Township, Paoli area.
I am familiar with Easttown and it's inspectors. You may have drawn the unlucky straw and gotten one of the unreasonable ones. I am also familiar with their Hem-Fir requirement, but I am surprised that they are using it against you in this case. Maybe it would help to point out that floor I-joists are also generally not Hem-fir, or for that matter any other engineered lumber. They may just not be familiar with the produxt you are planning on installing.
Nick,
I believe you are correct. I had dealt with the township engineer in the past in another township (Charlestown) , and all he required was a structural engineers stamp. I also believe in the future this will benefit me, but for now I guess I have to jump through the required hoops. If we get under way, feel free to stop by and take a look.
John
Good luck. Let us know how it turns out. And feel free to e-mail me with the location of your job. I have several old customers that I visit fairly frequently in Paoli.
[email protected]
Try calling a state building official for his opinion. In my state local requirements cannot be more restrictive than the code adopted by the state (UBC now, but International code when the legislature adopts it.)
Steve
Strange, In Maine most local ordinances cannot be less restrictive than state ordinances but can be more so.Excellence is its own reward!
Same in here in NC ( all local s h i t overides), but I'm from PA (Lancaster) and and always liked the Township designations (sorry about the regulations), within the counties... It's okay, I can fix it!
They have currently adopted BOCA 1990. This ordinance it over and above the code. Evidently they had big problems at one time with a lot of complaints from homeowners that if Spruce was used, it twisted and warped. They even just shut down a builder because he used S-P-F roof trusses.
John
> Strange, In Maine most local ordinances cannot be less restrictive than state ordinances but can be more so.
Ditto here in California. Local codes can be more restrictive, not less, and of course, stranger. ;-)
-- J.S.
When I've been confronted with a circumstance like this, the codes agency will usually buy off if you can document from the mfg. that the product in question meets or exceeds code requirements for strength, durability and so forth. If you have such engineering documentation and the inspector has decided to play bureaucrat, I would go up the ladder to a higher paygrade.
We follow CABO code which is pretty much the same as UBC, but none of the codes address every situation. Good luck.
Does PA have a statewide code yet? When I lived there, it was very confusing. One township inspector would say something like, "I don't care if you build the biggest tent in the world as long as the septic's OK," while the next township over would fully enforce BOCA.Andy Engel, The Accidental Moderator
No, it's still that way. Very annoying. In the township that this thread is about, PVC for drainage is fine but PEX is illegal for water. A few townships away it is the opposite. It's fun trying to remeber which is which.
A few years ago I got some hem-fir for floor joists. The hem-fir had a funky reddish brown color that would rub off onto the hands. I saw this stuff at local yards and a big box.
I eventually called the mill to see what the story was. The mill guy said not to worry it was just a stain. They were applying it because the mill was also sending a lot of hem-fir to Japan and someone in Japan required Hem-Fir to have a certain level of redish brown color.. so the mill stained it.
Mike
It's O.k. to think out of the box, Just don't walk off of the plank!
What's the difference between hem-fir and doug-fir? In the structural tables they get lumped together, so are they the same kind of tree, or just structurally similar.
-- J.S.
They're not the same at all. Doug fir is not a "true" fir though its growth characterists are similar. Since I'm in an area where Doug fir is the predominant framing species, I only see hem-fir in pressure treated form. If you can find a table that lists strength characteristics of various wood species, you'll find that Hemlock, grand fir, white fir, etal, have lower strength values for shear, tension, modulus of elasticity and so forth, than Doug fir and I'm surprised that a code chart would lump them all together, especially for floor joist and rafter spans.
And I'm not doubting your word. It might be that with the conversion to lumber of fast-growing plantation type 40-year-old doug fir, that the strength characteristics of the "good old days" no longer apply.
Edited 9/19/2002 4:30:27 PM ET by Notchman
This is interesting and confusing. We have either have SPF or southern yellow pine here in central NC. SPF for studs, plates, supported sills, rafters, shorter span joists...SYP for longer spans and beams, stair stringers...and the PT stuff is all SYP. Why do the inspections dept, have problems with Spruce/ Pine/Fir? It's okay, I can fix it!
Because sometimes they're just plain IDIOTS!
When I worked in the lumber industry, we shipped all our Utility (#3) and Economy (#4) toTexas because it met code there (if they have codes; I'm not sure). This was all doug fir...thing is, for stud walls, all it has to do is hold up drywall and some kind of siding on a single story house.
Edited 9/19/2002 9:23:52 PM ET by Notchman
They are very structurally similar. The Douglas is only about 75 psi stronger. When you're talking about 2,175 psi and 2100 psi for select its not a big difference.
Well, Here is the latest. Submitted structural comparisons of S-P-F, Hem-Fir#2 and the Nascor column. Even though the Nascor column was superior they still mandate an appeal be filed to get approvel. As time is a factor, I recommended we substitute the hem-fir with TJI Timber-Strand studs. Even though there are many TJI beams through out house, they also require an appeal to use Timber-Strand studs. They said if I used 2x6 Hem-Fir studs they would let it go. Now the next problem. It seems that Hem-Fir is nor redily available in the Ontario region. They consider SPF superior to Hem-Fir. The majority of Hem-Fir found in Ontario comes from the New Youk area. If anyone knows of a supplier in the Toronto area that carries Hem-Fir. I would appreciate it.
John
Nascor Building Systems of Pa.
>> It seems that Hem-Fir is not readily available in the Ontario region.
So what are other builders in the area doing? Paying off the building officials to get their plans approved with non-conforming materials?