ccbuilding
Sawhorse
Jurisdiction has adopted appendix G
Installation of pool on a rural 5 acre lot - back property line is in middle of river - side property lines fenced, but doesn't fit barrier requirements - pool has an automatic powered safety cover that complies with ASTM F 1346 - front of property has house and fence that doesn't fit barrier requirements. Home owners don't want a barrier fence across their lot, because it would block the view of the river. They MIGHT be agreeable to a barrier fence along side and front of lot on property lines, but don't want the fence to be any closer to house or pool than property lines. River is large enough and fast enough that a small child cannot cross safely to get to the pool, but an older one (10+) could.
Jurisdiction is requiring fencing before C of O. Home owner (who btw is a pair of lawyers) and contractor are disagreeing with fencing requirement - because.......
AG102.1 General. For the purposes of these requirements, the
terms used shall be defined as follows and as set forth in Chapter
2.
SWIMMING POOL. Any structure intended for swimming
or recreational bathing that contains water over 24 inches (610
mm) deep. This includes in-ground, above-ground and
on-ground swimming pools, hot tubs and spas.
HOT TUB. See “Swimming pool.”
SPA, NONPORTABLE. See “Swimming pool.”
AG105.5 Barrier exceptions. Spas or hot tubs with a safety
cover which complies with ASTM F 1346, as listed in Section
AG107, shall be exempt from the provisions of this appendix.
Ok - I know it's a stretch, and I KNOW if you use common sense (remember though we're dealing with a written code and lawyers, and nowhere in the code is the words common sense used) --- a pool is not a hot tub and a hot tub is not a pool - but home owner and contractor says that if the definitions tell you to look at swimming pool definitions for hot tubs, and hot tubs with safety covers are exempt from the barrier provisions, then a swimming pool with a safety cover should be exempt also.
Before we end up in court over this, I was hoping for some clarity from the wisdom of this bb? Is there any chance they have it right, has ICC screwed up in their definitions, and a cover should be allowed as a standalone safety devise, or is a barrier the only way to go?
And no I don't know why they waited until January and -10 to +20 temperatures to install a pool. Crazy!
Installation of pool on a rural 5 acre lot - back property line is in middle of river - side property lines fenced, but doesn't fit barrier requirements - pool has an automatic powered safety cover that complies with ASTM F 1346 - front of property has house and fence that doesn't fit barrier requirements. Home owners don't want a barrier fence across their lot, because it would block the view of the river. They MIGHT be agreeable to a barrier fence along side and front of lot on property lines, but don't want the fence to be any closer to house or pool than property lines. River is large enough and fast enough that a small child cannot cross safely to get to the pool, but an older one (10+) could.
Jurisdiction is requiring fencing before C of O. Home owner (who btw is a pair of lawyers) and contractor are disagreeing with fencing requirement - because.......
AG102.1 General. For the purposes of these requirements, the
terms used shall be defined as follows and as set forth in Chapter
2.
SWIMMING POOL. Any structure intended for swimming
or recreational bathing that contains water over 24 inches (610
mm) deep. This includes in-ground, above-ground and
on-ground swimming pools, hot tubs and spas.
HOT TUB. See “Swimming pool.”
SPA, NONPORTABLE. See “Swimming pool.”
AG105.5 Barrier exceptions. Spas or hot tubs with a safety
cover which complies with ASTM F 1346, as listed in Section
AG107, shall be exempt from the provisions of this appendix.
Ok - I know it's a stretch, and I KNOW if you use common sense (remember though we're dealing with a written code and lawyers, and nowhere in the code is the words common sense used) --- a pool is not a hot tub and a hot tub is not a pool - but home owner and contractor says that if the definitions tell you to look at swimming pool definitions for hot tubs, and hot tubs with safety covers are exempt from the barrier provisions, then a swimming pool with a safety cover should be exempt also.
Before we end up in court over this, I was hoping for some clarity from the wisdom of this bb? Is there any chance they have it right, has ICC screwed up in their definitions, and a cover should be allowed as a standalone safety devise, or is a barrier the only way to go?
And no I don't know why they waited until January and -10 to +20 temperatures to install a pool. Crazy!