2012 ISPSC and Decks...hmmm...

[Glenn]

The new ICC Swimming Pool and Spa Code provides some great provisions to help keep folks safe in and around pools. As for "around" pools, some are questionable and I've got something to share...deck related, of course.

I recently provided a 15 minute presentation at the Composite Decking and Railing Conference in Atlanta. I then recorded the presentation into an online video so I could share it after the conference. This video was designed to inform industry executives about the new construction standards coming out that don't exactly accommodate the decking industry very well. It is intended to drive support for the mission of NADRA.org, and myself, to provide deck industry perspective in the code modification process. To help create codes that can be understood by those expected to adhere to them...the nation's builders and manufacturers.

Just want to give you that perspective.

There's a few parts to the recording I'd like to clarify in a re-recording sometime, but I also want to keep the video short. You can rag on me about them in this thread if you'd like.

[video=youtube;5Nc86euh0Dk]

 

[gfretwell]

This is why a lot of people say the government is out of control.

 

[SCBO1]

Thanks, Glen,

Adopt with ommissions or wait for the 2015 code with corrections are your choices IMO?

This code has gaps, sharp edges, slopes and is a bit slippery to enforce? 306.2, 306.4, 306.5 and 306.7

pc1

 

[Glenn]

This code has gaps, sharp edges, slopes and is a bit slippery to enforce? 306.2, 306.4, 306.5 and 306.7

That cracked me up this morning! Thanks for watching.

The 2015 ISPSC gets argued next year at the hearings. Get involved!

 

[steveray]

Pretty good video Glenn!.....I hope they don't make us slope decks 1/8" per foot.....

 

[Alias]

Thanks Glenn.

As steveray mentioned, I hope that the sloped deck concept isn't enacted.

Sue

 

[Francis Vineyard]

This is why a lot of people say the government is out of control.

I don't even have to read that between the lines; the writing is on the wall . . . "welcome to slippery jack . . . terrified cc members"

Francis

 

[Glenn]

I am sorry Francis, but that just went right over my head.

 

[Francis Vineyard]

I am sorry Francis, but that just went right over my head.

I was just making a little noise with my speed of sound remarks. Perhaps it would have made a little more sense if I had added more quotes:

. . . There's a few parts to the recording I'd like to clarify in a re-recording sometime, . . . You can rag on me about them in this thread if you'd like.

Would be beneficial if the Closed Captioning words were accurate.

I gree with gfretwell reply in the sense of unintended consequences where in your video becomes the individual inspectors' discretion of what's safe and will discourage people to apply for a permit because of some do-gooder thought the code could better written and make those types of decision for us. Hence then we come to the point that some of us will throw up our hands and not enforce certain parts of the code.

Now you are rightfully attempting to rectify these errors; and it becomes a complicated process because of new products that intended to make building safer or more durable cannot comply.

I can recall not too long ago an elderly couple came in and rightfully complained how it was nearly impossible just to build a 10x8 deck to the rear of their rancher on an acre. It took weeks for them to receive the needed zoning approval for setbacks; engineering review for easements. Now in some other states would have them install receptacles; tear the ceiling or floor up to put in tension rods, etc. It used to be a simple thing now it's crazy!

Francis

 

[gfretwell]

It took me 7 trips to the building department and 4 trips to an engineer just for the structural approval for a single story, 350 sq/ft, slab on grade, addition to my house.

 

[jar546]

It took me 7 trips to the building department and 4 trips to an engineer just for the structural approval for a single story, 350 sq/ft, slab on grade, addition to my house.

I would love to see your initial submission to the building department. Were the first few trips just to get info?

 

[ICE]

It used to be a simple thing now it's crazy!

The menace of rogue decks must be tamed.

 

[gfretwell]

I would love to see your initial submission to the building department. Were the first few trips just to get info?

The first trip was with the plans I drew (rejected, no engineering), site plan was missing a detail,

Trip 2 for the health/septic signoff,

Trip 3 Site map OK, zoning OK ... off to the engineer.

trip 4 rejected the engineering ... off to the engineer

Trip 5 rejected the engineering ... off to the engineer

trip 6, the engineer laid my original plan on his copier with his details, it passed ... go pay the engineer

trip 7, pay the building department, go to court to pay the county clerk, back to pick up my plans

 

[tmurray]

I don't even have to read that between the lines; the writing is on the wall . . . "welcome to slippery jack . . . terrified cc members"

That is a service provided by Youtube where it tries to figure out what is said and provide closed captioning. This does raise a good point though, It might be a good idea to add closed caption at the bottom of your videos for the hearing impaired or people who do not have headphones and work in an open air office.

 

[tmurray]

The first trip was with the plans I drew (rejected, no engineering), site plan was missing a detail,Trip 2 for the health/septic signoff,

Trip 3 Site map OK, zoning OK ... off to the engineer.

trip 4 rejected the engineering ... off to the engineer

Trip 5 rejected the engineering ... off to the engineer

trip 6, the engineer laid my original plan on his copier with his details, it passed ... go pay the engineer

trip 7, pay the building department, go to court to pay the county clerk, back to pick up my plans

Sounds like trip 1, 2 and 3 could have happened all at the same time. Not sure if that's a lack of work flow optimization on their part or not having the correct information on your's. The rest sounds like the engineer is incompetent and didn't provide enough details.

 

[Glenn]

That is a service provided by Youtube where it tries to figure out what is said and provide closed captioning. This does raise a good point though, It might be a good idea to add closed caption at the bottom of your videos for the hearing impaired or people who do not have headphones and work in an open air office.

Thank you for this explanation. I had no idea what that was all about.

Finally I now can laugh at the irony of the screen shot text. I thought Francis was calling me "Jack" as some derogatory term or something, ha, ha, ha!

I have had a few people suggest the closed caption thing to me. Probably something I should work toward.

Happy Thanksgiving to all. Please don't trample or fight with anyone in the stores today. Remember to be thankful.

 

[gfretwell]

Sounds like trip 1, 2 and 3 could have happened all at the same time. Not sure if that's a lack of work flow optimization on their part or not having the correct information on your's. The rest sounds like the engineer is incompetent and didn't provide enough details.

The biggest problem was that the intake clerks threw it back at you with the first discrepancy and do not look any farther.

 

[tmurray]

The biggest problem was that the intake clerks threw it back at you with the first discrepancy and do not look any farther.

That makes more sense as to why it took so many times. We do a complete review before sending requests for more info and clarifications. It doesn't make sense to me when departments operate this way. The easier I can make it (in the way of reducing red tape) to get your permit the more people are going to voluntarily come in to get one and not try to do it under the radar.

 

[gfretwell]

That makes more sense as to why it took so many times. We do a complete review before sending requests for more info and clarifications. It doesn't make sense to me when departments operate this way. The easier I can make it (in the way of reducing red tape) to get your permit the more people are going to voluntarily come in to get one and not try to do it under the radar.

I have to agree. The plan reviewers were overloaded and gave the intake clerks too much discretion about throwing permits back at you in my opinion. I really had the feeling that they did not want people to do any additions to old houses. They are very tight on the FEMA 50% rule and that shuts most people down right away.

The most ironic thing for me was the plan that finally passed was exactly my original plan, laid down over an engineer's template and copied with exactly ONE detail that I didn't have already.

He got it from a handout from the Florida state building commission that he had to root around on his desk to find. (2 extra #7 rebar in a beam). There was no actual engineering going on.

 

[ICE]

Two "extra" #7 bars in anything sounds like engineering is going on.

 

[SCBO1]

Seven trips?

Next............Number 27!, number 27! "Sir, you don't have the right code year listed and we don't accept plans on a Sonic napkin, bring it back with the correct information including three sets of stamped plans! ..........next....number 28!

pc1