• 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

Old codes

B

bill1952

SAWHORSE
Joined
Aug 12, 2021
Messages
2,115
Location
Clayton NY
House built in 1963 in Utah. UBC? And did it regulated 1&2 family dwellings?

If nothing has changed requiring a permit, any clue if a porch over 30" high would have been required to have guards? And if so, height of guard? I can only guess the 4" sphere rule was not in effect in 1963 but sure I'll be called out if it was.

Insurance and lenders may make the code question moot.

Is this an @Glenn question?
 
1963 was decades before the formation of the International Code Council. Back then, the three model building code organizations each had their own codes for commercial buildings, but they jointly promulgated the CABO One- and Two-Family Dwelling Code. The ICBO was one of the three organizations underwriting the CABO code.

archive.org

CABO: One and Two Family Dwelling Code : Council of American Building Officials : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

BY ORDER OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOROffice of the Federal RegisterWashington, D.C.By Authority of the Code of Federal Regulations: 24 CFR 200.926b(c)Name of...
archive.org
 
Yankee Chronicler said:
1963 was decades before the formation of the International Code Council. Back then, the three model building code organizations each had their own codes for commercial buildings, but they jointly promulgated the CABO One- and Two-Family Dwelling Code. The ICBO was one of the three organizations underwriting the CABO code.

archive.org

CABO: One and Two Family Dwelling Code : Council of American Building Officials : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

BY ORDER OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOROffice of the Federal RegisterWashington, D.C.By Authority of the Code of Federal Regulations: 24 CFR 200.926b(c)Name of...
archive.org
Click to expand...
My research suggests CABO was not till early 70's. I think 71 was the first edition? Not finding any codes - broadly at least - for houses. Would guess some jurisdictions had their own.
 
bill1952 said:
If nothing has changed requiring a permit, any clue if a porch over 30" high would have been required to have guards? And if so, height of guard? I can only guess the 4" sphere rule was not in effect in 1963 but sure I'll be called out if it was.
Click to expand...
I looked in the 1975 CABO and did not find the word "Deck" or "Platforms" in the index, however the 1993 CABO section 412.4 listed "platforms".

I believe the word "platform" is the prior term used for "Deck". Section 412.4.1 uses the 30-inch rule above a main floor which may have or may not have been forwarded into the current guard rail requirements?

The 4-inch sphere for spindle spacing came in after the 6-inch code requirement, that I know. It wasn't to long ago that the ledger was allowed to be nailed to house rim, obviously that has changed per new code adoptions.

I remember back when we had the UBC I had to learn to calculate lumber spans and the Building Chief (BO) had made a printout. I also remember other surrounding communities plagiarized that document, and builders and lumberyards all wanted a copy.
 
If I remember correctly the CABO code originally allowed 9" between balusters or horizontal bars. It was reduced to 6" in the late 80s, and later on to 4". BOCA was the same. I'm not sure about the other model codes.
 
In reviewing the 1954 document, it is sad that I seem to understand the older codes easier than the newer codes. The old codes had commentary and diagrams in the code which made it easy to understand. Now days, it seems that everyone is looking for the exceptions to the rules instead of compliance with the rules. I must be getting too old.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top