Building Consistency Meeting
Residential
Date: 1/2/2007 Recorder and minutes prepared by: Danny Wooten/Jeff Griffin
Staff present: Rob Ellis, Tim Taylor, George Rogers, Steve Kellen, Ken Turull, David
Williams, Mike Creech, Ron Dishman, Yates Smith, Patrick Biddy.
Public present: Chris Newton/Hans Kasak (Ryland Homes), Bob Mckee (Ryan
Homes), Daniel McBride (Cunnane Group), Randall Feinster (Beazer Homes), Stu
Jelenick (BRI), Scott Dellinger (Drafting & Design, Inc), Jason Whitener (Dienst
Homes), Darren Price (M/I Homes), Rob Merrell (Griffin Masonry), John Meeks
(Apple Blossom Insulators), Terry Cleary (Meeting Street Homes), David R.
Schwieman (D.R. Schwieman), Rod Spence (Banister Homes).
Topics/Subject
Decisions/Conclusions/Actions
Old
Business
None
New
Business
Residential
sprinkler
system
Discussed the issue with a recent proposal submitted to the NC State
Building Code Council and a proposal submitted to ICC. The NC
proposal to require sprinklers in new residential construction was denied
at the December BCC meeting but concerns remains related to fire
protection on residential structures. Issue was sent to committee for
further review. There is a proposal also that has been again sent to ICC
its RB62-RB70 dealing with changes to the 2009 IRC Code. This goes
to ICC committee for a vote in February and we will monitor the several
proposals before ICC to see how this progresses through the process.
Decks on new
construction
dwellings
Issues was brought up as to having a separate permit on a deck attached
to a home and if the house permit can get a final inspection and CO
without having the deck closed out. With new construction typically we
would prefer to have all permits closed out before allowing a CO but if
the deck area is made safe so that someone would not walk out on and
use then we could final out the house. A photo of an actual jobsite issue
was passed out (see attached), showing a deck without any handrails or
guardrails and a piece of plywood over a patio door out to this deck
area. A piece of plywood would not be allowed in this situation and in
order to get a final on the house which in this example is on a separate
permit (deck was permitted after start of the house) a proper Code
compliant guardrail would have to be installed over the patio door
opening. In addition the field inspector would need a letter from the
builder stating that the guardrail will remain in place until the deck has
obtained its final inspection approval. This would allow the house to
move forward with a CO and the deck that was on its own permit to be
safely dealt with as a separate issue.
Foam in the
attic
2x4 handrailsexterior
applications
NC Residential
Code
commentary
Errata sheets
On-line plan
review
submittals
Stair winder
uniformity
There is an increase in the application of sprayed foam sealed attic
applications and one of the main products seen in this market has been
the Icynene foam. We have had many meetings dealing with the
application and reviewed the products ICC evaluation report. The
evaluation report will be followed by Department dealing with several
applications and assembly’s typically used. The greatest issue that has
been discussed for some time had to do with storage located in an attic
area and if an ignition barrier was required. Based upon review of the
Department with installer a letter of understanding was draft from that
local installer and is attached. Ignition barrier will be required on all
exposed Icynene foam when there is storage in an attic. Other products
will also need to have a ICC evaluation report which will be followed
for attic installations.
An amendment was brought before the Building Code Council in
December which has been modified to also again allow 2x4 handrails in
garages and exterior installations; this was approved by the BCC. This
has not yet made it through the entire process and cannot be currently
allowed but should be available soon.
The Department has received one of the first copies of the NC
residential Code and Commentary, this was passed around the round to
make all parties aware that this is now available from ICC and is the
first NC commentary ever produced. This has the full code in it and
commentary on many items explaining the intent of various sections of
the Code. Information is very useful and is available on CD as well.
All parties were advised that the NC 2006 residential Code has several
typing errors in the first printing; errata (correction) sheets are available
from the State on their website at www.ncbuildingcodes.com and can be
downloaded. When you go to the States website it can be found by
going to the tab on the left side called “adopted Code information” and
then the errata tab will come up.
Issue discussed about the Department going to full plan review on
March 3rd of this year. One effort being put forward is an on-line plan
review submittal process. The question that was asked was if the
Department will have any training sessions dealing with how to
submitted documents on line. We will be asking our IT Department if
some could be set up as this application becomes available and will
advise when and where these training sessions will occur.
This issue was brought up previously dealing with winder tread
uniformity vs. the standard tread and if they need to be uniformed to
each type at some point (now being called the walk line in the code).
Issue is that winders only have to meet their minimum requirements and
be uniformed with other winders but not uniformed with standard
treads. We will be working up a formal interpretation with an
illustration and have available shortly.
Re-posting
interpretations
on the website
Soffit
protection
requirements
on townhouses
Interior egress
door openings
Interpretations dealing with the 2002 Code have been updated and will
be handed out at the next consistency meeting. Some interpretations
were not re-printed due to changes in the code and the Department will
have the website updated shortly with these new interpretations based
on the 2006 Code.
Drawing related to soffit protection on townhouse was presented as an
alternate with protection applied to the bottom of the top chord or
underside of rafter rather than at soffit line. Based upon the language the
building code council adopted for townhouse soffit protection the
method described in section 2.2 would require this to be directly
underneath the vinyl or aluminum soffit covering. Protection would be
required at soffit line not at higher elevation as detailed in drawing
below:
Issue is being discussed about the usage of the double door to interior
habitable spaces requiring an egress door of 2/6x6/8. Several builders
have plans that use a double 4/0 french door going into those spaces and
would both leaflets be allowed to meet the requirements, also how does
locking devices play a role (head bolts on stationary panel or just ball
catches), issue will be brought back to the group at the February
consistency meeting.