Braced Wall Line Exception

[Olmedo]

I'm using the BWL spacing exception in Table 602.10.1.3 and adjusting the amount of bracing from table 602.10.3(3) using the factor from 602.10.3(4). The plans examiner says I can only use that on one braced wall line (I'm using it on two parallel braced wall lines for a 32'x24' house) Is this true? He is also saying that my second floor ledger deck has to adhere to 301.2.2.2.5 (#2) and thus extend no more than 6'. I didn't know that applied to decks?? The house is very simple (32x24 like I said) and in no way irregular. Should I stand my ground or lie down and pay for a wet stamp?

 

[mtlogcabin]

What code edition and what seismic and wind zones are you in?

 

[cda]

Welcome
Calif.!!

 

[Olmedo]

IRC 2015 (Can't find any pertaining amendments but it's WA state) Seismic Zone D1 and Wind 115 mph zone C

 

[Olmedo]

They just called me back on the bracing and admitted I was correct. So now it's just the deck issue

 

[mtlogcabin]

A deck over 6 ft from in width from the structure gets engineering here in our seismic zone D-1. The issue is usually with getting the connectors correct for the lateral loads.

 

[Olmedo]

Thank you Mtlog. I'm not going to fight it but it just seems like 301.2.2.2.5 wasn't written to apply to decks. Why would the IRC include an entire section devoted to decks including spans for joists that extend well over 6' and not mention it? Also, the AWC has a 20 page booklet on prescriptive deck code and mentions D seismic zones several times but never mentions a 6' limit. Frustrating but I'm just going to shorten the deck to 6' and if I add to it later I will only have to pay for engineering for the deck instead of paying for the entire house including the deck.

 

[mtlogcabin]

We only require engineering for the deck not the entire house and the deck

2012 IRC
R507.2.2 Alternate deck ledger connections.
Deck ledger connections not conforming to Table R507.2 shall be designed in accordance with accepted engineering practice.

A deck without a roof over it would result in a live load exceeding 40 PSF due to our snow loads therefore Table R507.2 can not be used.

 

[Olmedo]

See that makes sense. Unfortunately my snow load is only 25 psf and my ledger conforms to table 507.2