• 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

Richland Washington adopts the IGCC

The press release says it has been adopted as a nonmandatory document for commercial buildings. ??? That means, basically that it is available, if desired, much like LEED, but not required.

Kind of ironic, since Richland WA has been part of superfund cleanup due to all the DOE nuclear contamination dating way back to the 1940s.
 
What's the point in adopting a non-mandatory green code, except getting a newspaper article written about you? Anyone could say that we've adopted LEED non-mandatorily (I mean that we will accept LEED submittals if you want to do them!).

Perhaps the Building Dept. adds some language to the C of O if it meets the Green Code, other than that I don't get it if it's voluntary. Hasn't building above/beyond code requirements always been allowed but non-mandatory?
 
What do you do if the completed project does not comply with the IGCC? If the finished project does not comply with the permit documents you deny the CO until it does. If the completed project does not comply with the IGCC do you deny the permit forever or do you require that it be torn down and correctly? In both cases the cure is worse than the non-compliance from a green perspective. What does the IGCC allow you to do?
 
In some communities, Green is a status symbol. Green is good. Green is 'new'. Green is moral. Green can be any thing, but it usually means a fight either with the contractors or with the politicians. Some days, I'm with Conarb: I wish it would just go away; but it's difficult to fight City Hall when City Hall wants 'GREEN.' In this status-oriented atmosphere, if someone is denied their "green certificate" it is like wounding them publicly. Might as well put them in the stocks in the City square and throw rotten tomatoes at them. There is a huge difference in requiring green building standards and recommending them. It starts with the soft-sell of recommending. It leads up to green being required. I think it's time to retire from the system. I was born and raised near Hanford [on the downwind side] and I can tell you that government denies any harm, even in the face of evidence presented. Statisticians can make anything seem plausible; and they can even argue the figures are skewed one way or another for dfferent reasons. All smoke and mirrors.
 
Mark K

If it is Non-Mandatory that means that the higher standards referenced in igcc 102.4 to the minimum code are un-enforcible therefore I would view it as a contractutal problem between the owner and builder.
 
"What does the IGCC allow you to do? " Answer: Spend tons of money without tangible results. Oh, and buy worthless books, codes, certs, and seminars from the ICC.
 
I guess I don't need to point it out, but we have mandatory green codes here in several AHJs, and the state green code is going to be mandatory statewide on January 1st (unless the Sierra Club gets an injunction to block it until they can get a more stringent code adopted).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top