overall opinion of IEBC

[BSSTG]

Greetings,

I've been asked to do look into the possibitlity of adopting the IEBC. In this area of Tx I don't personally know anyone using it. As a result, I was wondering if some of you fine folks could give me some opinions on using this Code. The challenges here are that we have a number of mixed use buildings that folks want to change into lofts and such in portions of the building. Of course there would be other applications as well and not just R occupancies. I know that I may be asking a really broad based question here. But I've got to start somewhere.

My thoughts/questions are such

Does IEBC conflict with the IBC chapter 34?

Should chapter 34 IBC be thrown out if IEBC adopted?

Any conflict with IFC?

Overall opinions of the IEBC? positves? shortcomings?

Will it make my life easier?

Will the building owners like it?

Do you require registered design professionals to evaluate the projects prior to submittal?

Of course all of yall's opinions and thoughts are welcome and not just direct answers to these questions.

thanksabunch

BSSTG

 

[Frank]

IBC Chapter 34 is being deleted in favor of reference to the IEBC for 2015 I Codes

All of the I codes are suppossed to play nice together without conflicts.

Typically it requires an RDP fo rthe design

We have had it for a couple cycles and it is rarely used. This will likely change when Chapter 34 goes away.

 

[mtlogcabin]

Chapter 34 is incorporated into the IEBC

Chapter 34 already references the IEBC as an alternative to the IBC Chapter 34

The IEBC is composed of 3 parts and the designer chooses which part he wants to use so in essence Chapter 34 is still available to use

The 2015 IBC Chapter 34 will be comdpose of one section that sends you to the IEBC.

On a whole it can be confusing at first because it will bounce you all over the place to find what is applicable to a particular project. The key is do not go to a specific section because you know it deals with a specific portion of the project. Always start with the charging language and go to the specific sections or code it sends you to

 

[VillageInspector]

We have used it here in New York with state modifications for the past few years and I like it. Yes its true it does sort of bounce you around a bit but overall I think it streamlines the process.

 

[jpranch]

Been using it here in Gillette but it sure could be used a lot more. I like it and it can save developers a lot of money depending on the scope of work. You are correct that chapter 34 will not be part of the 2015 IBC as the ICC board who decides the scope of all the codes voted to delete it last year.

 

[SCBO1]

I see where there's a use for it but it is the ol' one step forward two steps side ways format the the code books use when doing the reviews. Use a lot of sticky notes to mark all the code books with and you'll do fine. Agree with jp, helps the developer with the $$$ if they crack the book open.

pc1

 

[jar546]

We prefer the use of the IEBC over Ch 34. Much more detailed information.

 

[north star]

= ( ) =

You would need to formally adopt one or the other for use,

[ i.e. - not use some cobbled assembly of both ], and then

actually use the one adopted.

Agree with others, ...the IEBC is more detailed in scope

and application.

"Will it make my life easier? IMO, yes, because you would haveonly that standard to use.

Will the building owners like it? IMO, ...not really a concern.......Accurately

reading and interpreting the standard will provide the building owners

an accurate starting point for their project........If it were me, I would want

accurate, legal options to help me with accomplishing my project, or to

assist me in determining whether the project is cost feasible or not.

Do you require registered design professionals to evaluate the projects

prior to submittal ?This option will be an AHJ specific determination......In

some cases, it would be easier for the AHJ to have this requirement,

since it would take "the initial interpretation \ evaluation aspect" out of

the code officials hands".

Again, ...IMO, some developers \ building owners \ contractors

purposefully use the Code Officials as their designer \ code

reviewer, hoping that they will not be as thorough as an RDP, ...plus

the cost of a Code Official \ Plan Reviewer would be significantly

lower in costs.

= ( ) =

 

[righter101]

We have adopted and currently use the IEBC in the State of Washington (as an alternative to Ch 34).

I feel that it is the best written code of all the ICODES. JMHO.

I would encourage it's use.

(an not just for target shooting)