• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Attic access?

permitguy said:
I think the crawl space suggestion was meant to be a joke. As for above the topmost floor, that's the problem faced in the picture in the OP - precisely why this thread is now on its third page for something that is really pretty simple in terms of intent.
Click to expand...
Thanks keeping me straight.
 
If you are going to call it a concealed space then you will need to look at Fireblocking and Draftstopping.

It easier to call it an attic, and provide the access
 
Pcinspector1

If it is an not an attic, it is a concealed space.

How would you insulate this area since it's been determined not to be an attic, the sloped framing members are still roof rafters, and should be insulated as such.

The framers could have left out the sheathing, but that disrupts the horizontal diaphragm loads
 
Found this pic to help explain my position to allow them to divide the space to less than 30 sq ft.

http://www.houleinsulation.com/finished_attics_in_story_and_a_half_homes.html

It really depends on how they insulate the space.

1. If they elect to place all the insulation in the rafters there's is no attic it's all conditioned space. I know of no requirement to provide access to any conditioned space.

2. If they elect to insulate the floor, kneewall and top of rafter then it's an attic if it meets all the requirements for height and sq ft. I would allow them to partition off that space if they desire as long as it's vented in order not to provide access.

I would, if mine, be finishing with insulating the rafters and having lots of storage space and access on both sides of the room behind the walls.
 
The visual handbook of building and remodeling, 3rd edition would require the knee wall to be insulated as well as the floor space. Funny, it list this as an attic floor in the handbook. Hum

pc1
 
I have followed many of the posts on this site and have found that most of the bantering between participants is comical. It lights the spirit of the day to read some very interesting points of view. It is a shame that some members seem to have more of a problem than others getting along. I view each persons responce as thier opinion and certainly would not attack their opinion feeling that mine is superior. I accept it and move on. I hope that the personal attacks can be minimized without stopping the spirit of the discussions. I think the photos and comments found here have helped me view my inspection responcibilities in a much better manner. Just my opinion and thank you to all who participate.
 
permitguy said:
I didn't say anything about "throwing". I suppose you think I should waste all day (and the taxpayers money) listening to your brilliant logic about furring strips magically transforming this into something other than what it is? Sorry, it won't happen. I've better things to do.On the contrary, the taxpayers would not expect me to be wasting my time with individuals who would attempt such cute stunts in an effort to circumvent legitimate requirements. Most are appreciative of our efforts to protect them from the likes of unscrupulous design professionals and contractors who spend more time scheming about how to do it wrong than it would have taken to just do it right.
Click to expand...
What makes 30" legitimate and 29" not legitimate?

The difference is trifling.

Enforcement of trifling violations of the code justify the installation of trifling solutions.

Save your authority for something meaningful.
 
This is the top "story" and if it is a cathedral ceiling, there is no "attic" for "attic access".

If there is a space ABOVE the ceiling in this room meeting 30" x 30sf, it is the "attic".

Move along folks, nothin' here to see . . . .
 
brudgers said:
What makes 30" legitimate and 29" not legitimate?The difference is trifling.

Enforcement of trifling violations of the code justify the installation of trifling solutions.

Save your authority for something meaningful.
Click to expand...
I actually agree based on this subject. The purpose of having an attic access is to be able to provide maintenance on piping, mechanical, electrical, ect. If there are none of these in this space, I would simply call it a concealed space and move on.
 
What about maintenance on the thermal insulation? Typically, it will not

remain in place indefinitely, or at least the roll / batt type. The "sprayed

in" type will. Just sayin'...

.
 
What makes 30" legitimate and 29" not legitimate?The difference is trifling.

Enforcement of trifling violations of the code justify the installation of trifling solutions.

Save your authority for something meaningful.
Click to expand...
The pic shows more than either 29" or 30". The difference is a larger volume of space, thus a larger fire, which is why I'd be fine with additional compartmentalization as has been suggested (and as the code allows). I don't pick and choose what I want to enforce.

The purpose of having an attic access is to be able to provide maintenance on piping, mechanical, electrical, ect. If there are none of these in this space, I would simply call it a concealed space and move on.
Click to expand...
Regardless of the commentary, I believe there is more to the intent of this section than just maintenance of systems and equipment. Otherwise, you wouldn't be able to install any systems or equipment up there if you chose to avoid providing access by effectively draft-stopping the attic into smaller compartments (as allowed). You have fuel, you have oxygen, you have an ignition source, you have a sufficient volume of space to allow for fire development, and you have sufficient clearance to allow access for the purpose of inspecting the area. It isn't difficult or costly to install (common arguments against any requirement). I just don't see what all the fuss is about.
 
permitguy said:
You have fuel, you have oxygen, you have an ignition source, you have a sufficient volume of space to allow for fire development
Click to expand...
All of those conditions apply to a space less than 30" high to exactly the same degree.

And once you provide access you generally will increase the fuel load with stored materials and the potential ignition sources with the electrical lighting system (plus whatever might be stored).

In other words, your zealous enforcement almost certainly increases the hazard.

That's the big deal.
 
WOW, I was bummed because I couldn't see the OP picture, and post a response earlier in the week, thought this would be a dead post by the time I got to look at it this weekend....... NOPE, alive and thriving.

So, IMHO, yes this is an attic, access required. I was overruled by a CBO in the past, based on his opinion (as previously mentioned) that access only invited a possibility of storage. NOT MHO.

Hey, it was fun reading through the posts though, had not even tried to keep up with this one, as I had not seen the picture in the OP.
 
I don't like the attic access requirement unless it's to service a piece of equipment. Why you ask? People put crap up there, and although they are "sized" to accommodate a firefighter in bunker gear, the FD guys are going to put a hook in the ceiling and tear the whole darn thing down rather than use the access.

the only purpose they really serve is to allow the insulator a way out when he's done.

I've seen them placed in bathroom ceilings (a really bad idea IMHO) because that's the only area allowing the headroom, even though the attic is > 30 sf.

Homeowners don't know not to just pile crap in these convenient storage spaces we give them.
 
Well.. I did... It doesn't matter if the truss bottom chords can handle the loads the homeowner subject them to.. we give them a storage hole.. and they use it.. I don't like the attic access requirement.. at all...
 
peach said:
Well.. I did... It doesn't matter if the truss bottom chords can handle the loads the homeowner subject them to.. we give them a storage hole.. and they use it.. I don't like the attic access requirement.. at all...
Click to expand...
I was joking Peach.....though in this case it appears that the floor system is the same, in the "attic" area, as in the living area....
 
I get a kick out of reading some of the outrageous attempts to avoid reality on this board. Makes me glad not all the posters are code officials.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top