• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Attic access

jar546

jar546

Forum Coordinator
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
11,051
Location
Somewhere Too Hot & Humid
Just had a home built with engineered trusses. On plan review I asked that the attic access opening be shown on the prints.

For framing inspection, the trusses are 16" o.c. and although on the prints, it is was not done because they are trusses and with that spacing, they cannot provide access without cutting the trusses. I referred them back to the truss mfg for a detailed drawing, something I should have asked for at plan review.

Now the truss mfg and builder are trying to get out of it due to the design. They have asked me for relief from this requirement and saying that the regular opening in the 16" o.c should be fine. Me say no, I don't have any legal authority to waive minimum code requirements. There are no mechanicals in the attic and it is not storable.

How do you folks handle this?
 
So far I have found that we can come up with another suitable location for a hatch. It doesn't have to be in a ceiling,, , in the "side wall" of a cathedral space perhaps, or even outside on a gable wall. It just needs to be there for the Fire Department to look in (otherwise, they will cut a hole wherever they please : ) (tell the homeowner that and they will find a solution quickly enough)
 
Yankee said:
So far I have found that we can come up with another suitable location for a hatch. It doesn't have to be in a ceiling,, , in the "side wall" of a cathedral space perhaps, or even outside on a gable wall. It just needs to be there for the Fire Department to look in (otherwise, they will cut a hole wherever they please : ) (tell the homeowner that and they will find a solution quickly enough)
Click to expand...
Great ideas but in this case they painted themselves into a corner. Not many options.
 
Seems to me that the truss company should be able to give documentation on cutting one truss. I have asked and received this type of information often. I guess they will have to let the paint dry and get the fix to you.

docgj
 
I would try to locate a hallway, closet, utility room, or other small space where two walls that run perpendicular to the trusses can be used to support and tie off the cords of an altered truss. I might require a document from the truss manufacturer authorizing the proposed altercation. Typically, to cut one truss in order to achieve the required 22" X 30" opening, a few rafter ties and 2x supports is all that is required. In one case I can think of, the truss manufacturer required that the cut truss webbing/chords be reinforced with plywood attached to both sides of the truss 10' beyond each side of the cut.

Partial burn-outs on trussed homes, and one large commercial warehouse, have created other opportunities where PE's have designed similar fixes.
 
I don't have any legal authority to waive minimum code requirements.
Click to expand...
You can modify the requirements such as a different location as suggested by yankee. Modifying a truss can be a BIG headache but then again a 16" oc truss is only about a 14" clear opening which is pretty small for most people to squeeze through. I have never seen 16" oc truss layout except a modular home.

The rough-framed opening shall not be less than 22 inches by 30 inches (559 mm by 762 mm) and shall be located in a hallway or other readily accessible location.

2009 IRC R104.10 Modifications.

Wherever there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of this code, the building official shall have the authority to grant modifications for individual cases, provided the building official shall first find that special individual reason makes the strict letter of this code impractical and the modification is in compliance with the intent and purpose of this code and that such modification does not lessen health, life and fire safety requirements or structural. The details of action granting modifications shall be recorded and entered in the files of the department of building safety.
 
Jar,

Truss Manufactures come up with fixes all the time for cut cords and webs. It just cost the contractor a little dough. But you said no equipement and no storage, does that mean there is less than 30" of vetical height?
 
jar,

Truss companies take the tissue paper the contractor gives them that's missing information like pitch, overhang, openings, bearing walls etc. then design and are often told to change things by the contractor after the plans are completed. I worked for a truss company and know from expereance, the contractor just does'nt think about where the opening will be. A truss can be modified in the field to get your access 22x30, may have to go around the contractor, most truss people want good relations if they want to sell more trusses. If the opening was noted on your review I think the contractor should comply with the request or see if walmarts hiring! let's thin the herd!

pc1
 
Pcinspector1 said:
jar,.......If the opening was noted on your review I think the contractor should comply with the request or see if walmarts hiring! let's thin the herd!

pc1
Click to expand...
All the advice it great. Just hate the thought I'd have to look with those guys later in life though.
 
If the truss company doesn't have the sense to leave space for access, they may not have enough sense to design a fix.

But make em do it anyway.
 
Can't believe that the contractor didn't have enough sense to move one truss over 8" and still keep the over all 16" spacing. I'd bet the span rating on the roof sheeting would've allowed it.

Bill
 
KZQuixote said:
Can't believe that the contractor didn't have enough sense to move one truss over 8" and still keep the over all 16" spacing. I'd bet the span rating on the roof sheeting would've allowed it.Bill
Click to expand...
Yeah, increasing the load on a truss by 50% shouldn't be an issue...contractors practically being engineers and all.
 
brudgers said:
Yeah, increasing the load on a truss by 50% shouldn't be an issue...contractors practically being engineers and all.
Click to expand...
This from the founding member of the Professional Regulators Inspectors and Contractors Knowledge Sharing Board

Can you say Whatever?!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
An attic access hole is all we are dealing with hear but a truss designer should have a check list of items like: is there an attic fan in the hallway, is there any vaults I should be aware of, areas that require stick framing, who's bringing donuts today and can I use the center wall for bearing or not! Questions to ask the contractor or have on the tissue paper plan that's submitted to the AHJ.

Contractor should not be moving trusses 8" without the truss manufactures engineered stamped fix. I will not suggest the repair fix nor tell the contractor how to fix the problem because I'm not a design professional with stamp. Plan review is the best place to note the locations of openings or other truss related issues IMO.

KZQ, interesting acronym!

pc1
 
Last edited by a moderator:
KZQuixote said:
Can't believe that the contractor didn't have enough sense to move one truss over 8" and still keep the over all 16" spacing. I'd bet the span rating on the roof sheeting would've allowed it.Bill
Click to expand...
I like that idea.

Perhaps equally good is to nail and glue a 3/4x4x4 sheet of plywood over several truss cords and cut a hole for the proper sized openings. Most likely sufficient to allow the cutting of a truss.
 
But since we inspectors are so unqualified we would have to get the approval of a PE to tell us that. Right George? After all, it is a truss system that is engineered as a system and we we are not qualified to make such decisions as it is not prescriptive.
 
jar546 said:
But since we inspectors are so unqualified we would have to get the approval of a PE to tell us that. Right George? After all, it is a truss system that is engineered as a system and we we are not qualified to make such decisions as it is not prescriptive.
Click to expand...
You seem to have practiced engineering before. I don't see why my comments would induce you to not do engineering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top