They're not making it any easier

[MushCreek]

I was reading about two upcoming things that are going to make DIY harder/more expensive. The first article was about energy conservation; that insulation specs were getting tougher, as well as other energy saving regulations. The other article was about residential sprinkler systems, which are starting to be required in some states, with others planning to follow suit soon. While I feel greener houses and safer houses are a good thing, it sure makes it tougher for the little guy trying to carve out a homestead. It's also getting tougher to find places that don't enforce all the rules and regulations. Just something for everyone to be aware of when making their plans.

[rocking23nf]

I think if the guy is building it  himself, it should be fully disclosed in the event of a sale. Otherwise, you should be able to build what you want within reason.

[Don_P]

I guess I'm kind of hoping they make the codes so hard on folks that people will finally get up off the couch and do something about it. The sprinkler vote was a ballot stuffing manuever last year by the firefighters. Seems they got free tickets and accomodations to attend the vote. Minutes after the vote the crowd in the hall dropped by half, mission accomplished, they went home. I wonder who paid for all those tickets  . I believe its scheduled to roll in in 2011, according to my local inspector he doesn't think we'll adopt it in our state, we declined the crazy foundation bolting schedule this past round.

Let your state representatives hear from you. The building code is written by a private non profit corporation (the employees of which average $90k+/year). They are heavily... I say HEAVILY influenced by industry and insurance lobbies. They write the code, hand it to your representatives who are advised by the code enforcement community. The representatives do not and/or cannot read or understand it, and it is generally rubber stamped for your enjoyment. In SC, NY and several others, the code states that all plans must be executed by a registered design professional, might as well throw out the codebook, there is no prescriptive code in those rogue states unless the local jurisdiction chooses to ignore the state law. I wonder who got a free architect job for that law  .

[rwanders]

I was in inspection (QA/QC) for many years---industrial not residential----I agree with your comments on the code organizations. Especially regarding the NFPA 70 code. It is commonly called the electrical code but the NFPA is the National Fire Protection Association. A lot of their code is very good but every three years the manufacturers and the IBEW insert a lot of self-serving additions that add little to safety but are targeted to their economic interests. 

[cordwood]

I think if the guy is building it  himself, it should be fully disclosed in the event of a sale. Otherwise, you should be able to build what you want within reason.

The rub here is "Who's Reasoning"?!!!!!!! I have unfortunately been on both sides of the problem. In California where I had to get a planning commission approval for a 3' tall garden fence to rural Arkansas where we have no restrictions and the previous owner used Romex into the boxes but tape spliced 14 gauge stranded automotive wire (used) thru the walls and ceilings , We wondered why the microwave struggled so hard on a dedicated circuit with 12/2 wire coming out of the box. . No "P" traps or vents on the plumbing, Whew!!! That got fixed fast!!
If they would give tradesmen and laymen a little more input than the purse holders it would actually make things safer and easier I think, But just letting idiots build at will has proved dangerous on too many occasions.

[John Raabe]

Codes and building regulations were invented to solve heath and safety issues. On this foundation things like installing smoke alarms, safe wiring, and sturdy railings have saved thousands of lives and even a foolish builder should want to comply. Inspection and correction of such unsafe building elements is a public service well worth paying for since it adds little to the cost of the home. Little argument here.

But alas, rules are made by human beans, and that means they can be subject to all the human foibles such as greed and self-aggrandizement.

Thus we can now pile on addiitional rules about the style of a garden fence, the color of your siding and when and for how long a garbage can can be outside. Many other rules have been implemented primarily to protect property values. These types of rules can drive a reasonable person crazy and into the realm of conscientious non-compliance.

[rwanders]

On the other hand, most code requirements are definitely 'minimum" and most folk would be very unhappy if their home only "meets code", ie floors that mimic trampolines. If no one ever sold a house they built that didn't meet basic code requirements it would probably not be a issue. To some extent, they are there to protect unsuspecting and/or inexperienced buyers.

[Don_P]

A little semantics clarification of how the alphabet soup is organized might help keep all this bureacracy in order. The ICC is the International Code Council, they publish the IRC, the International Residential Code, the IBC, International Building Code, the IECC, Int'l Energy Conservation Code and all of the other "I" codes. The IBC is used for commercial construction in most state with the less stringent IRC being used for residential 1&2 family construction being used for homes in most. Some states or localities do not recognize the IRC, which allows and specifies prescriptive, non engineered, methods of construction. Those jurisdictions require all construction be according to the minimums set by the IBC.

This is the adoptions SC has made, the state apparently has adopted the '03 IRC, MushCreek. Local jurisdictions can adopt a more stringent code if they want to;
http://www.iccsafe.org/government/map/sc.htm

This is the national adoptions map;
http://www.iccsafe.org/government/adoption.html

Do not count on an inspector to know what version or code he is supposed to be enforcing, competence is all over the road. You also have to chose your battles.

The I codes are updated every 3 years and then states or jurisdictions decide whether to adopt the "model" code, or parts of it. They may amend it for their jurisdiction as well. My state typically reviews and adopts the codes about 2 years after they come out, some adopt immediately, some are still working off of the 2000 version. We choose not to adopt some of the more nutball things that come down the pike, so I'm hoping we don't adopt the sprinkler provision. I'll have a full time job doing water repairs of our summer residents cabins if it goes through. I have serious doubts if the sprinklers will operate 20 years down the road if they are not maintained, and they won't be. It strikes me as a feel good law, but I've been wrong before. There is a balance we must strike, every cost increase knocks another person out of home ownership and that usually means they are living in some form of "less safe" housing than the one we hope to get them into.

I do agree with the intent of building codes although some of the provisions really rub me the wrong way. In general though look at death tolls in the rest of the world after a disaster and look at ours, speaks for itself.

[MushCreek]

Thanks for the links, Don! My property is in Greenville County. I've talked to the head of the Building Department twice, and he seems to be very helpful and laid back. He was very encouraging about a DIY build, and even offered me pointers for staying on the good side of the inspectors. I've actually read through much of the building code, and most of it seems to be the same stuff that's been around for quite a while, although some of the new stuff showing up in parts of the country is a little concerning for the low-budget builder, especially when I see the dreaded words "Must be installed by a certified licensed contractor". Since I'm planning to start building a home soon, I've become a little hyper-sensitive to all of the changing regulations, as they may pose a threat to my already limited budget. I guess not having a choice on a lot of things just sticks in my craw.

[Virginia Gent]

States don't have to adpot the codes. And even if they do, they can edit them to suit. An example, here in Virginia, the latest codes we use are from 2006 (IBC & IFC) and it was made illegal to have a Christmas tree in your dwelling, if that dwelling was an apartment. Well needless to say, that pissed a lot of people off. The state legislature, in adpoting the 2006 codes, edited them and part of that editing was removing the stipulation that no Christmas trees were allowed in apartments. So simply because something is passed in a series of code books, doesn't mean it will come to fruition if your state/county adopts them.

I am training to become a fire fighter, but I am a Libertarian above all else. Fire sprinklers in a house are a great idea, but it should be optional in my opinion. I suggest writing your reps and asking them to edit the new code books being passed, if adpoted, to allow people to choose, in the building process, if they want to add a residential sprinkler system. I have been in contact with my state reps doing just that.