Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

[RickAstoria]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309Plan Approver and TJacobs, 2008 Oregon Residential Specialty Code--------------------------------------------------------------R302.1 Exterior walls. Construction, projections, openingsand penetrations of exterior walls of dwellings and accessorybuildings shall comply with Table R302.1. These provisionsshall not apply to walls, projections, openings or penetrationsin walls that are perpendicular to the line used to determine thefire separation distance. Projections beyond the exterior wallshall not extend more than 12 inches (305 mm) into the areaswhere openings are prohibited.Exceptions:1. Detached tool sheds and storage sheds, playhousesand similar structures exempted from permits are notrequired to provide wall protection based on locationon the lot. Projections beyond the exterior wall shallnot extend over the lot line.2. Detached garages accessory to a dwelling locatedwithin 2 feet (610 mm) of a lot line are permitted tohave roof eave projections not exceeding 4 inches002 mm).3. Foundation vents installed in compliance with thiscode are permitted.Table 302.1.JPG[/attachment:qkytxh76]----------------------------------------------------The only thing that mentions lot line is in Exception #2. Detached Garages are ACCESSORY BUILDINGS.This pertains to fire separation construction between a dwelling and an accessory building.TJacobs, when I say substantially parallel and substantially perpendicular.Take a wall on a garage that is diagonal from the dwelling. Lets say it is 10 degrees +/- from being true parallel, I would still treat it as if it was parallel for all portions of the wall within 5-ft. If the wall was say only 10 degrees +/- from perpendicular then I would treat it as perpendicular. The 45 degree mark will be a tricky one. I know the dictionary definition but I am looking at fire conditions and know enough about fire that a wall that is only slightly off from parallel will need the same level of protection as if it was true parallel. Heck, in construction, it will likely not be absolutely true parallel anyway. Its rough framing anyway. So, anyway, it is a judgment call anyway.I had to meet R302.1 as defined above with a garage/accessory workshop on the same lot with the house even though there was a 4-ft. space in between the walls of the dwelling and the accessory building.We treat accessory buildings on the same lot much the same way as if there was a lot line.At the time, I was working with IRC 2006 - 5 ft. rule before 2008 ORSC was adopted with amendments. Taking the stricter of IRC (5-ft.) and the stricter requirements of the 2004/2005 ORSC edition. Fire marshal would want 5-ft. anyway being fire rated. The ones in our area can be an _________. I was aiming to spec 3/4" Type X on both side. Interior and exterior grade. I remember having some questions about that. Some thoughts I had was making that wall portion be some sort of brick faces or CMU / Concrete brick or something of that sort. I would typically build the wall with brick facing and possibly some type of ICF or concrete back wall and 5/8" Type-X on the inside. This would have made construction interesting. It was an interesting thought. I also looked to the fire code as well.

View attachment 52

View attachment 52

/monthly_2010_05/572953b4f05c0_Table302.1.JPG.d8f429ea1dbb9ea6fa13e1bb7f5319fc.JPG

 

[brudgers]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

Over and out.

I read the commentary and it's pure rationalization.

The ICC imagines that fires start in garages, so they come up with rules, and then come up with reasons after the fact.

The statistics don't bear out the rule.

Look at page 28 here: http://www.usfa.dhs.gov/downloads/pdf/p ... _Fires.pdf

Only 4.5% of dwelling fire injuries originate in the garage!

If you want to keep fire from spreading, fire rate bedrooms and kitchens.

 

[RickAstoria]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

Over and out.

I read the commentary and it's pure rationalization.

The ICC imagines that fires start in garages, so they come up with rules, and then come up with reasons after the fact.

The statistics don't bear out the rule.

Look at page 28 here: http://www.usfa.dhs.gov/downloads/pdf/p ... _Fires.pdf

Only 4.5% of dwelling fire injuries originate in the garage!

If you want to keep fire from spreading, fire rate bedrooms and kitchens.

That is what the FIRE CODE is for.

:lol: Then whatever the FIRE CODE OFFICIAL says regarding fire safety goes, basically. The B.O. won't argue it.

In addition to the minimums of code, as a design professional (registered or non-registered), we have a professional standard of care and that can be higher then the minimums of code. If you get to understand your client's life style, then we could specify on the plans for higher fire-rating in the mentioned areas, which is legally binding to contractors to follow accordingly (if they want their checks) or approved alternatives.

 

[brudgers]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

In addition to the minimums of code, as a design professional (registered or non-registered)

No such thing.

Do what it takes to get a license.

 

[RickAstoria]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

In addition to the minimums of code, as a design professional (registered or non-registered)

No such thing.

Do what it takes to get a license.

Design professional with dictionary definition is a professional of design. So it can mean anyone including a professional artist.

Building code definition of "DESIGN PROFESSIONAL" is ONLY applicable for the meaning of Design Professional of Responsible Charge as used in the Section title header in R106.3.4.1 (and 106.3.4.1 in the OSSC). Nowhere else in the 2008 ORSC uses "Design Professional". They used "Registered Design Professional". I did a text search in the code on the PDF copy I have that has working text searching. So, with that said, design professional means a professional of design anywhere other then R106.3.4.1 (2008 ORSC) or 106.3.4.1 (2007 OSSC) when it is not a code text citation.

BTW: Building Designers are building design professionals as well as architects, interior designers, engineers, interior architects. You are an RDP (Registered Design Professional). Courts have already ruled building designers as design professionals and has ruled that professional standard of care applies to them as they meet any other design professional.

It is well established that design is not limited to architects and it is long established in legal definition and case rulings that the meaning of professional is not limited to licensed professional. Courts have long taken standard definitions to apply in court decisions.

You seriously think that the folks who design the buildings shown are not professional?

http://aibd.org/

Lets not tangent on design professionals. With all that is said, I am still planning to get licensure. Economy doesn't make it easy to get hired and begin IDP process. You should be aware of that brudgers.

 

[kilitact]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

Chapter 2 in the ORSC

Try to remember the IRC code definition for design professional is one who is a Registered Design Professional.

A non-professional designer, such as yourself, is not registered.

 

[RickAstoria]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

Chapter 2 in the ORSCTry to remember the IRC code definition for design professional is one who is a Registered Design Professional.

A non-professional designer, such as yourself, is not registered.

Remember IRC doesn't have a definition for 'non-professional designer' and IRC nor ICC dictates industry terminology. Remember ICC definitions are meant purely to clarify the meaning of words used in the code as applied in code. It has no bearing outside the code.

Oregon never even thought about the word Design Professional and all that it is used for is a subject header for a section. There are more authoritive sources of definition of "Design Professional" which can clearly include Web Design Professionals. ICC was frankly lazy and BCD was even more lazy. Noone in the Oregon's BCD or even ICC would consider design professionals to only be registered design professionals as if only registered designers are design professionals. Since code definitions are not meant to be applied outside of the building codes and the context in which it is used in the codes - it would be pure assinine (asinine) to assume that they aren't design professionals. You think that I am going to rely on IRCs definition of every definition of words?

R106.3.4 Design professional in responsible charge.

R106.3.4.1 General. When it is required that documents

be prepared by a registered design professional, the

building official shall be authorized to require the owner

to engage and designate on the building permit application

a registered design professional who shall act as the

registered design professional in responsible charge. If

the circumstances require, the owner shall designate a

substitute registered design professional in responsible

charge who shall perform the duties required of the original

registered design professional in responsible charge.

The building official shall be notified in writing by the

owner if the registered design professional in responsible

charge is changed or is unable to continue to perform the

duties.

The registered design professional in responsible

charge shall be responsible for reviewing and coordinating

submittal documents prepared by others, including

phased and deferred submittal items, for compatibility

with the design of the building.

now read --> R201

SECTION R201

GENERAL

R201.1 Scope. Unless otherwise expressly stated, the following

words and terms shall, for the purposes of this code, have

the meanings indicated in this chapter.

For the purposes of this code - means for the intent and meaning of the words used in the residential code, the words shall have the meanings indicated in this chapter (Chapter 2) unless otherwise stated.

Read back up at R106.3.4 (the ONLY time Design Professional is used and read on to R106.3.4.1 - you'll realize that they are meaning Registered Design Professionals. They decided not to think any further of it. They didn't want to give a separate Definition for Design Professional as R106.3.4.1 doesn't really talk about unlicensed design professionals as R106.3.4.1 is purely about a requirement for when a document is required to be prepared by a Registered Design Professional, the B.O. is authorized to require the Owner to designate who the RDP is - on the building permit and if there is a change in the RDP, the owner shall notify the B.O. and the RDP in responsible charge is responsible for coordinating and reviewing submittal documents for compatibility with design of building.

That is all Design Professional is used in the code. Everywhere else is Registered Design Professional.

You are kind of expected to have a vocabulary larger then the I-codes' dictionary (the definitions listed in the code) and that terms like truss drawings, design professionals, chimneys, and nearly every word in the code has many more definitions and that there are many more words used in this professional. ICC is not the ONLY dictionary. R106.3.4.1 doesn't list anything special requirements for unlicensed design professionals.

I use more then the building codes for a dictionary. Alot more sources accepts building designers such as myself as a design professional then one single organization. Even AIA and the architect & engineering boards approves / accepts building designers as design professionals. We just aren't REGISTERED DESIGN PROFESSIONALS. Do you want to go over court before the State Attorney General and US Chief Justice of the Supreme Court - over the term design professional when used outside the context of R106.3.4 / R106.3.4.1 of the residential code.

I accept the meaning of the term as it is used in the code because there is NO other use of that term in the code. NO, commentaries are not code.

Enough Kilitact. I know what is says and the limits of the code definitions. You're using the code definition outside of scope of Chapter 2 applicability. You are applying it to a forum message not a code text interpretation.

 

[brudgers]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

The cow is crossing the desert.

 

[RickAstoria]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

The cow is crossing the desert.

brudgers, yeah. Hope Kilitact can follow the cow along with the vultures.

 

[kilitact]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

Design Professional=Registered Design Professional

Register Design Professional=Design Professional

Read the code when talking code.

 

[cboboggs]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

Here we go again. Rick, Killitact take this argument somewhere else. We have rehashed this over and over again on two different forums enough is enough already. Just agree to disagree and move on.

 

[kilitact]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

cboboggs, you must've not read any of the other(s) post

 

[High Desert]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

kil & rick: since we're all from Oregon, why don't we schedule a face to face debate on the subject. I can moderate the debate, and no, it will not occur in the octagon ring (MMA).

 

[RickAstoria]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

Design Professional=Registered Design ProfessionalRegister Design Professional=Design Professional

Read the code when talking code.

Kil, are we asking what R106.3.4 means?

NO!

Design Professional is not a code only terminology. It is used in the industry as a shorten form of building design professional which is any person or firm that offers and performs architectural, building design, interior design, and engineering services for remuneration who complies with common and widely accepted definitions of a professional.

I am not required to have architect or engineering services when performing building design services. The services requires technical knowledge in order to competently design houses.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

How to Become a Building Designer

Required Education for a Career in Building Design

Most building designers have completed some type of formal education. All have usually obtained at least an associate's degree in building design. A program will generally take between 1 and 2 years to complete. Programs in this field can be found at vocational schools and community colleges or through a distance learning program. You may continue your education through an accredited architectural school as well. Classes in this program include construction, residential home design, college algebra, physics, and construction laws and ethics. You may also go on to obtain the title of 'Certified Professional Building Designer' by gaining additional training, passing an exam, and working in building design for 6 years.

Skills Required for a Career as a Building Designer

You will need to have an interest in math, physical sciences, and construction engineering in order to excel as a building designer. Because the work often takes place in uncomfortable conditions, you will need to be willing to function in extreme environments. Finally, you will need the communication skills necessary to work with both clients and fellow construction professionals.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Can you grasp that the code definition is and should only be used to understand words and terms used in the code to understand the code section? Usage of words that do not comply with code is acceptable and legal when it not a code text quotation or an interpretation of a code section.

 

[RickAstoria]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

kil & rick: since we're all from Oregon, why don't we schedule a face to face debate on the subject. I can moderate the debate, and no, it will not occur in the octagon ring (MMA).

We can meet in Astoria since we will have a Residential Building Code class in Spring 2010. (Part of the Historic Preservation and Restoration program at Clatsop Community College).

 

[kilitact]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

Please read chapter 2!!! Definitions the terms Design professional and design professional are interchangeable, and repeated throughout the 2008 Oregon Residential Specialty Code, try to read and understand the code. :!: :roll:

High Desert, what I would appreciate is for you to officially state your position on this. One of my concerns has always been that since these are public sites a unsuspecting consumer will read these a..nine post and think you can build anything to do with residential without being required to be a design professional.

 

[RickAstoria]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

Please read chapter 2!!! Definitions the terms Design professional and design professional are interchangeable, and repeated throughout the 2008 Oregon Residential Specialty Code, try to read and understand the code. :!: :roll: High Desert, what I would appreciate is for you to officially state your position on this. One of my concerns has always been that since these are public sites a unsuspecting consumer will read these a..nine post and think you can build anything to do with residential without being required to be a design professional.

The only reason Design Professional is even in Chapter 2 is because of R106.3.4. The term repeated is REGISTERED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL. The key word "REGISTERED". If you are a building design professional and not registered then the word is not REGISTERED but Non-registered OR Unregistered if you follow English grammar rules and proper words.

I have read Chapter 2 not once but well over 1000 times. 2007 OSSC dropped the word Design Professional from the definitions. "Design Professional" is used ONLY once other then in the Definitions in Chapter 2. That would be only 2 locations in the ENTIRE book. It can be removed from the definitions and leaving only Registered Design Profession.

For your information - Read ORS 671.030 and 672.060. The architectural and engineering act does not prohibit a person from making plans & specifications for exempt buildings such as single-family residences of any size.

There is no statutory prohibition of an unlicensed person from using the knowledge of the architectural arts & sciences and the knowledge of the mathematical, physical and engineering sciences as part of the process of making plans & specifications for exempt buildings. Those unlicensed persons simply may not refer to themselves by the architect or engineer title or make claim that they are or make claim that they can offer or offer architectural or engineering services as if they are licensed. Simply put, an unlicensed design professional may not misrepresent themselves as architects or engineers and ability to offer services to non-exempt buildings.

Now to put it, I'm going to use the word design professional as I see fit. I will only use design professional in the way the code defines it IF I am making an interpretation or clarification on R106.3.4.

I am delineating Design Professional and Registered Design Professional. Registered is an adjective to the object of subject "Design Professional". "Registered" is what delineates and makes the indication that the person is a licensed/registered with the state board.

The code repeats "Registered Design Professional" but not repeat throughout the code "Design Professional" without the word "Registered". You show me where it is repeated as just "Design Professional" without the word Registered - other then R106.3.4 and in Chapter 2 definition.

We need to meet face to face. You bring a copy of the 2007 OSSC and 2008 ORSC with commentary and without the commentary. The adopted code is without ICC commentary.

The code is clear to use Registered Design Professional which I do not dispute the usage of other than when it maybe in conflict with state law and the exemption provision. That is what R102.2 addresses clearly. So then I expect something from either federal or local level at an adopted law (not regulation or administrative rules and policies) that says otherwise.

 

[texas transplant]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

Rick and Kil,

Putting on my moderator hat. Please either go back to the question that the thread really asked about, start a new thread in the Building Designers topic area, go private with your conversation, or just agree to disagree.

You two are acting like the irresistable force and the unmovable object.

Thanks

Texas Transplant

 

[High Desert]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

kilitact, why would my official position have anything to do with your difference with rick? I don't have a dog in this fight and don't wish to. I was just offering an avenue that would get you and rick and your constant bickering off of these forums.

 

[RickAstoria]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

kilitact, why would my official position have anything to do with your difference with rick? I don't have a dog in this fight and don't wish to. I was just offering an avenue that would get you and rick and your constant bickering off of these forums.

I'm willing to take the offer. Then we can schedule something... if Astoria isn't too far from you Kil.

 

[TJacobs]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

Plan Approver and TJacobs, 2008 Oregon Residential Specialty Code

--------------------------------------------------------------

R302.1 Exterior walls. Construction, projections, openings

and penetrations of exterior walls of dwellings and accessory

buildings shall comply with Table R302.1. These provisions

shall not apply to walls, projections, openings or penetrations

in walls that are perpendicular to the line used to determine the

fire separation distance. Projections beyond the exterior wall

shall not extend more than 12 inches (305 mm) into the areas

where openings are prohibited.

Exceptions:

1. Detached tool sheds and storage sheds, playhouses

and similar structures exempted from permits are not

required to provide wall protection based on location

on the lot. Projections beyond the exterior wall shall

not extend over the lot line.

2. Detached garages accessory to a dwelling located

within 2 feet (610 mm) of a lot line are permitted to

have roof eave projections not exceeding 4 inches

002 mm).

3. Foundation vents installed in compliance with this

code are permitted.

Table 302.1.JPG[/attachment17z6req]

----------------------------------------------------

The only thing that mentions lot line is in Exception #2. Detached Garages are ACCESSORY BUILDINGS.

This pertains to fire separation construction between a dwelling and an accessory building.

TJacobs, when I say substantially parallel and substantially perpendicular.

Take a wall on a garage that is diagonal from the dwelling. Lets say it is 10 degrees +/- from being true parallel, I would still treat it as if it was parallel for all portions of the wall within 5-ft. If the wall was say only 10 degrees +/- from perpendicular then I would treat it as perpendicular. The 45 degree mark will be a tricky one. I know the dictionary definition but I am looking at fire conditions and know enough about fire that a wall that is only slightly off from parallel will need the same level of protection as if it was true parallel. Heck, in construction, it will likely not be absolutely true parallel anyway. Its rough framing anyway. So, anyway, it is a judgment call anyway.

I had to meet R302.1 as defined above with a garage/accessory workshop on the same lot with the house even though there was a 4-ft. space in between the walls of the dwelling and the accessory building.

We treat accessory buildings on the same lot much the same way as if there was a lot line.

At the time, I was working with IRC 2006 - 5 ft. rule before 2008 ORSC was adopted with amendments. Taking the stricter of IRC (5-ft.) and the stricter requirements of the 2004/2005 ORSC edition. Fire marshal would want 5-ft. anyway being fire rated. The ones in our area can be an _________. I was aiming to spec 3/4" Type X on both side. Interior and exterior grade. I remember having some questions about that. Some thoughts I had was making that wall portion be some sort of brick faces or CMU / Concrete brick or something of that sort. I would typically build the wall with brick facing and possibly some type of ICF or concrete back wall and 5/8" Type-X on the inside. This would have made construction interesting. It was an interesting thought. I also looked to the fire code as well.

Unbelievable...

 

[RickAstoria]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

Unbelievable...

Unbelievable..... it is.

 

[MarkRandall]

Re: Garage distance separation from dwelling - Section R309

What the heck did you guys do to my thread? I go away for a couple of days and get all this drivel in my thread. I would appreciate everyone staying on topic or go elsewhere to ramble on.

Reading the 2006 IRC, I still feel section 309 trumps section 302 when it comes to the separation of a dwelling from a detached garage on the same lot. It looks like several agree with me and a couple of people do not. That's fine.

I've completed my first scheme for this client and I'm extending the addition to a point five feet from the detached garage. I will talk it over with the client, but I'm leaning towards attaching the structures with a trellis and installing Gypsum on the interior of the garage wall. If the client decides to not do the trellis, my interpretation would allow no gypsum to be added to the existing garage.

 

[jar546]

I am resurrecting an oldie but goodie because I see that there are a lot of views by guests on this. Anyone have anything to add?