Construction Code Blues

[JamesVincent]

Just wait until you hear me start singing about the elegance and charm of the Internal Revenue Code......

Not long ago, I attended a building permit hearing at which I had to listen to architects and engineers argue about the interpretation and application of the international building code (which had been adopted locally). After I left, I told several people that I was looking forward to going back to my office and returning to the clarity and simplicity of the Internal Revenue Code.

And I meant it sincerely.

You aint whistling Dixie. I have never run into more frustrating then understanding building code. At least with taxes you have the IRC which applies to your Federal taxes. Even if you don't know the tax code Turbo Tax does, you can plug info in the little boxes and come out reasonably sane. State taxes are the same, here in Md they are based 100% on your Federal. All you do is punch in the little numbers from your Federal and whammo, your state taxes are done. Building code is an entire different ballgame, all the time, and a different ballgame in the next county and in the next one etc. There are very few things that are universal among districts and even then their not. Like if your putting up a deck. How deep do you put the footers? Theres a code for that. This county is 24", this county is 30", the state code is below frostline which is 30" (give or take) for Md. So, even though this county says a number less then state, you still have to do state. But you still have to know the code. Some places you can use 4"x4" for footers, some you have to use 6"x6'. And then theres the ones that say you can use 4"x4" for certain heights and then have to switch to 6"x6". (The funny thing is I always use 6"x6", much safer. Most of the other people I know do also. But when you take the test you have to know what actual code is.) I could keep going and going about this and thats only decks and the carpentry work. Then you start getting into the electrical, which wires you can run, which you cant, how many feet between junction boxes you can and cannot do and, again, the next county is different. In Md only a master electrician can touch a breaker panel (wink wink), in other states people with my license can do it and have it signed off. If you have a commercial license you cant do residential. If you have a residential license you can do commercial. I have a general construction contractors license which means I can build a house, do any type of commercial work, yet I cant do "home improvement", which is an entirely different license. I can put in new wiring, plumbing, walls, whatever, but I can't rip off a sheet of drywall and replace it, I have to have someone else do it for me. I can put in a new sink, but not a new cabinet. I can put everything in brand new while building but cant replace it after its built. Only someone with a MHIC license can do that, but they cant do commercial work at all. Yet in a commercial environment I can do everything.

And we start with getting permits and what permits you need. In Anne Arundel county, where I live and mostly work, basically if you do anything to a house, you need a permit (another wink wink), even if the homeowner does it. Repainting your living room? Need a permit. Redoing a flower bed and putting in a new one? Permit. It used to be a rule of thumb that if it was visible and cost more then $150 you needed a permit. Now basically any modification of the house or grounds you are supposed to apply for a permit. Again, something you need to know for the test. Other counties you could come close to building a house before you need a permit, and even then they probably wouldn't bother you. Honestly I dont know how people like my uncle can do it. He's a certified contractor in 3 different states and has his MHIC as well as WV and VA licenses and keeps them current. Then again hes done it for more years then Ive been alive and he also knows all the (wink winks) so that helps him out.

[Gregg]

I won't even begin oh what it cost to buy a historical home and then gut it all while staying within the rules. As for the hurdles and all, I assume its a nightmare based entirely on the checks I had to write.

Not complaining mind you, but the renovations cost far more than the house, and I'm told half of that was pleasing the historical requirements.

[.]

I find it interesting that this thread has devolved into a discussion of micro-regulation, over-regulation and the costs thereof. After some interesting commentary about the efforts of the IRS to make their multitude of forms more friendly to those from whom they are ineluctably going to extract their entirely legal pound of flesh.

It's all infinitely more interesting than the fact that nobody at Lost Horizons has EVER accurately answered a question of any kind, simple or otherwise.

[JamesVincent]

I won't even begin oh what it cost to buy a historical home and then gut it all while staying within the rules. As for the hurdles and all, I assume its a nightmare based entirely on the checks I had to write.

Not complaining mind you, but the renovations cost far more than the house, and I'm told half of that was pleasing the historical requirements.

Historical buildings are a whole nother ball game. Code is not necessarily different but it is. Building code is "supposed" to be what the local government considers a minimum safe building practice. It is indeed in most cases, however, like the example I used with footers for a deck, it turns into what the local government thinks, not really what is safe. Historical buildings, if they are to continue being historical, have guidelines that have to be met to meet the historical aspect. If you're working on an 19th century home it is going to have different building styles, different material use and have a lot different wiring and plumbing, if it has any. Quick examples, plaster and lathe instead of drywall, the possibility of no wiring or plumbing built in instead of a fully modern house.

Now the code/ not code part comes in when you start talking about structure and the appearance of the building. To retain the historical integrity of a building it has to look and feel like the original looked and felt. Somethings we do now they didnt do then and vice versa. However, the underlying structure must meet or exceed what is considered code for modern times. So to be able to do that a lot of times you have to gut and start over inside without destroying the outside appearance and do it in a way that the structure itself looks and feels "historical". One of the worst parts in dealing with a building like that is if it was built with no wiring and then someone added wiring at some point. More then likely it would have aluminum wiring which is a no-no everywhere. And removing the old wiring and putting in new in a structure that originally wasnt made for wiring is always fun. Same thing with plumbing, we use different materials for piping now then we did then so a lot of times the old has to be removed and replaced. Another fun job for a structure that wasnt made for plumbing. So now you have your interior structure going, then the exterior, for a home to be true, has to match what it originally was. Materials or styles that we havent used in 50 years are need to make the exterior comply and still be safe have to custom or hand made.

One of the good things about historical work is the old saw, they dont make them like they used to. A lot of times, if the woodwork is in good shop, it is already well beyond what code requires. Rough hewn 4"x12" was not unheard of as floor joists when code nowadays is 2"x10"s with a beam running across. Ive run into a few houses with 2"x6" studs when 2"x4" studs are standard now. So an older house may very well be stronger that what is built now, especially the old brick homes.

So, yeah, I can fully believe that the restoration cost more then the home. And that the largest chunk is trying to match the original and historical aspect of the home to what modern code calls for. It can be a flippin nightmare.

[tracer]

I have never run into more frustrating then understanding building code.

An acquaintance of mine once told me a story about grounding wires and natural gas pipelines.

If the gas line inspector comes over to look at your work, you had better not have any grounding wires attached to your gas main, or it's a code violation and your work won't pass.

If the electrical inspector comes over to look at your work, you had better HAVE a grounding wire attached to your gas main, or it's a code violation and your work won't pass.


A similar story of contradictory regulations was told to me by Ivan Cermak, of National Trust Services infamy -- supposedly the meatpacker's association requires the floor of a slaughterhouse to be wet, and OSHA requires the floor to be dry.

[JamesVincent]

I have never run into more frustrating then understanding building code.

An acquaintance of mine once told me a story about grounding wires and natural gas pipelines.

If the gas line inspector comes over to look at your work, you had better not have any grounding wires attached to your gas main, or it's a code violation and your work won't pass.

If the electrical inspector comes over to look at your work, you had better HAVE a grounding wire attached to your gas main, or it's a code violation and your work won't pass.


A similar story of contradictory regulations was told to me by Ivan Cermak, of National Trust Services infamy -- supposedly the meatpacker's association requires the floor of a slaughterhouse to be wet, and OSHA requires the floor to be dry.

IIRC your ground here is supposed to be to your water pipe. But drive a few miles and that may change. I personally have used main water since it is still a metal pipe and still grounded and I hate getting near gas mains, period.

The meat cutting issue may very well come from two sides of the same problem. OSHA may very well require a dry floor to prevent slippage. The meatcutters may require a wet floor to keep dust from drifting up onto the meat being processed.

I can tell you a story about the difference between OSHA and a private company or union. Years ago I worked for Home Depot unloading lumber trucks. OSHA states that all forklifts have a maximum speed of 2.5 mph. Home Depots policy was 3.5 mph. At some point in time Depot changed their policy to reflect OSHAs guidelines of 2.5 mph but didnt reset the governors on the lifts to reflect that speed. I was actually fired from Home Depot for driving a forklift too fast since I had the throttle cranked getting to another truck to unload, was fired on the spot by a safety inspector. Over the years Ive had a good deal of interaction with OSHA also and for the most part their concern is safety and a lot of it is common sense. They do have their moments though.

[tracer]

One complaint I've heard about OSHA, at least in the past, was that they were basically toothless. There was an episode of FRONTLINE on PBS a decade or two ago, about an ironworking company with an abyssmal safety record. There were hazards throughout their production floor that just wouldn't quit. They were cited by OSHA for numerous violations, but the company basically ignored them, and OSHA could do nothing to stop them.

Since it was FRONTLINE, the reporting may have been a little biased -- but I'm not at all clear on what OSHA's powers of enforcement actually are.

[JamesVincent]

A couple of decades ago I worked at the Dundalk Marine Terminal as a forklift driver working in receiving. We had a shop dedicated to crating items for shipping products overseas, including a full wood shop. One day two guys were ripping down a piece of plywood to make the side to a crate. One of them decided to be an ass and jerked the board through the saw. While the other guy was holding it. With no blade guard on the saw. We spent about 30 minutes looking for the guys fingers in the sawdust and other detritus laying around the shop area. Within a week OSHA was there and shut down the whole building until all of the equipment was up to standards. And all of us drivers had to retake the safety classes and be OSHA certified and not just state certified. So I don't know about toothless, maybe circumstances are different. I do know OSHA has popped into job sites here and there and forced changes in how I do things or how the main contractor does things.

[Randall]

And we start with getting permits and what permits you need. In Anne Arundel county, where I live and mostly work, basically if you do anything to a house, you need a permit (another wink wink), even if the homeowner does it. Repainting your living room? Need a permit. Redoing a flower bed and putting in a new one? Permit.

I can attest to that. Back when I was a City Councilman (or was it even earlier when I was on the Planning Commission?) we were looking at adopting the updated Uniform Building Code. UBC essentially - I don't remember the exact wording - would have required a permit for such things as wallpaper, painting, and hanging pictures. We eventually adopted the updated UBC with about 50 pages of revisions, amendments and 'ignore section x'.

[Mr. Mephistopheles]

A couple of decades ago I worked at the Dundalk Marine Terminal as a forklift driver working in receiving. We had a shop dedicated to crating items for shipping products overseas, including a full wood shop. One day two guys were ripping down a piece of plywood to make the side to a crate. One of them decided to be an ass and jerked the board through the saw. While the other guy was holding it. With no blade guard on the saw. We spent about 30 minutes looking for the guys fingers in the sawdust and other detritus laying around the shop area. Within a week OSHA was there and shut down the whole building until all of the equipment was up to standards. And all of us drivers had to retake the safety classes and be OSHA certified and not just state certified. So I don't know about toothless, maybe circumstances are different. I do know OSHA has popped into job sites here and there and forced changes in how I do things or how the main contractor does things.

My personal experience with OSHA inspectors is that they tend to take an educational approach initially and typically only get toothy after citing violations multiple times, or as in situations like you noted, when someone gets seriously injured or dies. I personally know of a situation where an employee got caught in machinery and died and the company was summarily fined well in excess of $100,000. The company had been cited for the issue and made no attempt to remedy the situation.