Bathroom without heating duct

[Genduct]

I didn't read all the comments, so perhaps someone may have wondered, like me, whether there was a combo light, exhaust, and HEATER installed in the ceiling, If no perhaps that may be a simple way to meet the Intent of the Code

 

[socaldano]

Built in 1963? There was no International Residential Code back then. Even the CABO One- and Two-Family Dwelling Code didn't exist -- it wasn't created until 1972. This means that unless there was a local (city) code in effect in 1963, there was no code at all. Here's what the 1992 CABO code said:

View attachment 14712

View attachment 14713

Bathrooms are not habitable rooms as defined in the CABO code (in fact, bathrooms are specifically excluded from being habitable rooms), so there is no requirement for a heating duct.

Ask the home inspector to cite the code that he/she claims requires a heating duct. The code in effect doesn't count -- it has to be from the code that was in effect when the house was built, or when the bathroom(s) was/were most recently renovated.

My experience with home inspectors is that they too often attempt to justify there existence by reporting as "required by code" a wish list of things that, while nice to have, but which were not required by the code at the time of construction. And that's the only code that matters.

Thank you for the answer to a long standing issue..Can I get more details? What is the legal principal that says the home does not need to be brought up to current codes (unless it is obviously and seriously unsafe, such as that very dangerous brand of electrical panel that must be replaced wherever found). We have "occupancy inspections" in St Loius County whenever there is a change of adult occupancy rental or owner occupied. We have some inspectors who declare the home unfit for habitation until a system is certified (usually electrical, plumbing, plumbing stack) unstated but to the most recent code at owners expense. I thought it might be "ex post facto laws" but I believe that only applies to criminal proceedings.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Thank you for the answer to a long standing issue..Can I get more details? What is the legal principal that says the home does not need to be brought up to current codes (unless it is obviously and seriously unsafe, such as that very dangerous brand of electrical panel that must be replaced wherever found). We have "occupancy inspections" in St Loius County whenever there is a change of adult occupancy rental or owner occupied. We have some inspectors who declare the home unfit for habitation until a system is certified (usually electrical, plumbing, plumbing stack) unstated but to the most recent code at owners expense. I thought it might be "ex post facto laws" but I believe that only applies to criminal proceedings.

You have it reversed. Building codes, in general, are not retroactive. The is no law that says a home does not need to be brought up to current code. The key point is that there is nothing in the code that says it DOES have to be brought up to the current code (unless an alteration triggers a requirement for some code upgrades). Local ordinances may impose some retroactive requirements outside of the building code, but the general premise of building codes is that a building remains under the purview of the code under which it was designed and constructed for the life of the structure (again, unless some new work triggers a requirement to upgrade something).

 

[socaldano]

You have it reversed. Building codes, in general, are not retroactive. The is no law that says a home does not need to be brought up to current code. The key point is that there is nothing in the code that says it DOES have to be brought up to the current code (unless an alteration triggers a requirement for some code upgrades). Local ordinances may impose some retroactive requirements outside of the building code, but the general premise of building codes is that a building remains under the purview of the code under which it was designed and constructed for the life of the structure (again, unless some new work triggers a requirement to upgrade something).

That is awesome, thank you. As long as there is no substantial work done on the system, the code does not require it to be upgraded.

 

[jar546]

That is awesome, thank you. As long as there is no substantial work done on the system, the code does not require it to be upgraded.

Not necessarily. The IEBC, local ordinances, and codes can be very nuanced. Don't try to find what you want to hear and think you are right. It is not that simple, and you may find yourself on the losing end of a lawsuit.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

That is awesome, thank you. As long as there is no substantial work done on the system, the code does not require it to be upgraded.

If any work is being done to any mechanical, electrical, or plumbing system, the code must be consulted to determine the extent to which the overall system has to be upgraded to conformance with current codes.

 

[Genduct]

If any work is being done to any mechanical, electrical, or plumbing system, the code must be consulted to determine the extent to which the overall system has to be upgraded to conformance with current codes.

I think the overarching fundamental is Does the bathroom have a problem maintaining the min temp required for a habitable space? A Rooms like this could be heated INDIRECTLY by the abutting spaces and hence, the absence of a heating register was not even noticed/ In fact, the exhaust fan may be drawing the tempered air from the hallway or other spaces.

So, key question, is it too cool to take a shower in the bathroom ?

 

[socaldano]

I think the overarching fundamental is Does the bathroom have a problem maintaining the min temp required for a habitable space? A Rooms like this could be heated INDIRECTLY by the abutting spaces and hence, the absence of a heating register was not even noticed/ In fact, the exhaust fan may be drawing the tempered air from the hallway or other spaces.

So, key question, is it too cool to take a shower in the bathroom ?

Two questions:
1. when it is too difficult to use best practices to heat a bathroom, can't one install a "heat lamp" in the ceiling? I believe this is where "variances" are in order. When the code drives many to use inferior practices to meet the letter of the law (the code), a variance is in order to avoid such practices. As I read "existing building code", unless the bathroom is new construction, the ventilation/heating requirement is void unless they pose a severe safety hazard. Am I understanding correctly?


2. When I was reading the existing building code (IBC). They said that ONLY the part of the system that is being repaired or upgraded must meet code. That the rest of the system has been proved safe by the test of time. Then they used the example of a tree branch crashing into a roof. Requiring a couple of trusses to be replaced. The damaged trusses must be to code, but the rest of the original trusses is not required to be upgraded. https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IEBC2018/EFFECTIVE-USE-OF-THE-INTERNATIONAL-EXISTING-BUILDING-CODE

My personal example was: A house had that evil dangerous electrical panel that was recalled. This is a 1930s home. The local city demanded the whole house be rewired, including the requirement the weather head raised. Ameren the utility was going to grant a variance on the drop to the house, until they were informed by the city was targeting this person, that despite the city punting, they unofficially communicated to the utility engineers that no variances would be tolerated for this home.
To upgrade the panel alone was $2,000 parts and labor, that was reasonable (a master electrician as a favor to a friend). To rewire the house, it would be full charge: $20,000 not including any repairs to drywall and such, to move the weather head was additional $8,000 estimate. With no justifiable benefit, other than removal of a dangerous panel that was about 5% of the estimated cost. Which is in conflict with the introductory statement of the existing building code (IBC). https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IEBC2018/EFFECTIVE-USE-OF-THE-INTERNATIONAL-EXISTING-BUILDING-CODE

The existing building code's mantra seems to be that the alterations shall not make the building less safe than before alterations or repairs occur.

 

[ICE]

"heat lamp"

If there is an energy code in place, a heat lamp is likely to be illegal.

 

[socaldano]

If there is an energy code in place, a heat lamp is likely to be illegal.

Good point... In Missouri, the statutory cities are limited to health and safety but they never obey the law anyways. The Charter Cities probably are able to enforce the "energy code". I have not figured that out yet, not found caselaw either way. But if the legislature ever says "no" to the energy code then it would be settled.

 

[Genduct]

Two questions:
1. when it is too difficult to use best practices to heat a bathroom, can't one install a "heat lamp" in the ceiling? I believe this is where "variances" are in order. When the code drives many to use inferior practices to meet the letter of the law (the code), a variance is in order to avoid such practices. As I read "existing building code", unless the bathroom is new construction, the ventilation/heating requirement is void unless they pose a severe safety hazard. Am I understanding correctly?


2. When I was reading the existing building code (IBC). They said that ONLY the part of the system that is being repaired or upgraded must meet code. That the rest of the system has been proved safe by the test of time. Then they used the example of a tree branch crashing into a roof. Requiring a couple of trusses to be replaced. The damaged trusses must be to code, but the rest of the original trusses is not required to be upgraded. https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IEBC2018/EFFECTIVE-USE-OF-THE-INTERNATIONAL-EXISTING-BUILDING-CODE

My personal example was: A house had that evil dangerous electrical panel that was recalled. This is a 1930s home. The local city demanded the whole house be rewired, including the requirement the weather head raised. Ameren the utility was going to grant a variance on the drop to the house, until they were informed by the city was targeting this person, that despite the city punting, they unofficially communicated to the utility engineers that no variances would be tolerated for this home.
To upgrade the panel alone was $2,000 parts and labor, that was reasonable (a master electrician as a favor to a friend). To rewire the house, it would be full charge: $20,000 not including any repairs to drywall and such, to move the weather head was additional $8,000 estimate. With no justifiable benefit, other than removal of a dangerous panel that was about 5% of the estimated cost. Which is in conflict with the introductory statement of the existing building code (IBC). https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/IEBC2018/EFFECTIVE-USE-OF-THE-INTERNATIONAL-EXISTING-BUILDING-CODE

The existing building code's mantra seems to be that the alterations shall not make the building less safe than before alterations or repairs occur.

Scoldano,
In an earlier post, I suggested that very approach of installing a combo Light-heat fixture to add some heat. Since the T'Stat is not in the bathroom, and people are often at various stages of un-dress then it is often seen as a best practice to do that Or even have an electric unit to provide that comfort.

The question is: what temp is the bathroom when it is cold outside? Is this an interior space with no real heat loss that needs to be heated. How is it you haven't been inconvenienced or even noticed that you Need Heat? the narrative doesn't begin to allow anyone to understand what is going on

Your 1930's home was what, knob and tube with a combo meter and single 30 Amp fuse ? I am old enough to have seen and replaced these legacy services in the early 60's. The Child Labor laws weren't enforced then and I was working for an electrician 2 summers in High School, Again, I have no idea what "They" saw

email me a contact number at genduct@gmail.com I would be happy to speak with you and offer a 2nd opinion

Best, Mike

 

[steveray]

If there is an energy code in place, a heat lamp is likely to be illegal.

Just like electric resistance >2Kw in 2024:

N1103.7.1​

Detached one- and two-family dwellings and townhouses in Climate Zones 4 through 8 using electric-resistance space heating shall limit the total installed heating capacity of all electric-resistance space heating serving the dwelling unit to not more than 2.0 kW or shall install a heat pump in the largest space that is not used as a bedroom.

 

[Genduct]

Just like electric resistance >2Kw in 2024:

N1103.7.1​

Detached one- and two-family dwellings and townhouses in Climate Zones 4 through 8 using electric-resistance space heating shall limit the total installed heating capacity of all electric-resistance space heating serving the dwelling unit to not more than 2.0 kW or shall install a heat pump in the largest space that is not used as a bedroom.

WOW, so the electric resistance in the Heat Pump, that is used when the unit can no longer provide heat because outside air temp is too low OR unit is going into defrost is now Not Allowed.
Then how is it supposed to work?

Thanks for bringing that info to the discussion. Am going to need to find out more about what they really have in mind, because it doesn't sound right

 

[steveray]

WOW, so the electric resistance in the Heat Pump, that is used when the unit can no longer provide heat because outside air temp is too low OR unit is going into defrost is now Not Allowed.
Then how is it supposed to work?

Thanks for bringing that info to the discussion. Am going to need to find out more about what they really have in mind, because it doesn't sound right

The INTENT is electric baseboard (or similar) which is why the heat pump reference in the last sentence, but your example is why it is a stupid section...

 

[SCBO1]

The bathroom does not have a HVAC vent and I am told by the buyer's home inspector that an HVAC vent is required in the bathroom.

IMO, Sounds like a "Go pound sand moment!"

 

[Wooly]

There is no code "requirement" however there is building science that supports spot ventilation in bathrooms. It is unlikely however that a home that age would need one unless you air seal and insulate.