• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

So what is right and what is wrong with the ICC?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wish I had done better?

Conference call today. Canidates forum with the New York Codes Coalition. Wish I could have been there in person but just do not have the funds to get there.
 
jpranch said:
So if we did go to a 4, 5, or 6 year cycle how could we best adapt quickly to new industry products and technologies? Of course you know that I have an opinion but I'm phishing!
Click to expand...
I am starting a local effort in the State of Washington to go to an every other cycle adoption (6 years instead of 3). My goal is to lobby the state to skip the 2015.

Our State has a Building Code Council that adopts the codes as well as providing state ammendments.

Currently we have annual updates, and they already have an "Emergency Rule Making" process in place. I feel that the existing Emergency Rule Making would satisfy any need of emerging technology or changes that couldn't wait until the next cycle.

I will keep everyone posted on my progress and success/failures in my efforts.

Everyone in Washington that I have spoken to supports this effort. I will have a formal presentation available in the Fall.
 
righter101 said:
I am starting a local effort in the State of Washington to go to an every other cycle adoption (6 years instead of 3). My goal is to lobby the state to skip the 2015.Our State has a Building Code Council that adopts the codes as well as providing state ammendments.

Currently we have annual updates, and they already have an "Emergency Rule Making" process in place. I feel that the existing Emergency Rule Making would satisfy any need of emerging technology or changes that couldn't wait until the next cycle.

I will keep everyone posted on my progress and success/failures in my efforts.

Everyone in Washington that I have spoken to supports this effort. I will have a formal presentation available in the Fall.
Click to expand...
Please keep me posted. Thanks
 
How are ISO reviews going to play into this effort? Because they kick your butt for not have the most current code adopted. Perhaps since WA is statewide they will take that into consideration.
 
ISO will give 8 points for adopting the most recently published code and as low as 4 if you ammend them. Not a big deal that I would worry about.
 
fatboy said:
How are ISO reviews going to play into this effort? Because they kick your butt for not have the most current code adopted. Perhaps since WA is statewide they will take that into consideration.
Click to expand...
ISO has way over played their own importance. Please start visiting with your local insurance carriers about how the insurance rates are determined and if ISO is any kind of a player. I did that here after we went through the whole smear. I was schocked to be told by more than one of our major insurance companies that they have not use the ISO in calcuelating rates for years! Won't mention any names. State Farm.... Opps!
 
We have found (not my Department) that the ISO rating really only affects homes that are in the floodplain of our community. These are a small percentage of the overall population, and the difference in the rating translates to a very minor increase on those affected.

Our policy was adopting every other series, until now. We just adopted the 2009's (from '06) as the Board felt the '12's placed too many additional requirements on residents.

mj
 
fatboy said:
How are ISO reviews going to play into this effort? Because they kick your butt for not have the most current code adopted. Perhaps since WA is statewide they will take that into consideration.
Click to expand...
We have an active "owner-builder" ordinance which decimates our ISO ratings. They tried to come meet up with us this year and I told them not to bother.
 
Once you research ISO you will learn what a waste of time they actually are. First gem of info---your ISO score only applies to those projects which you permit from your new score date until your next ISO review.
 
Yeah, I know, but the powers that be seem to think its a big deal. I know they are a waste, I've been through it twice.
 
And then the actual ISO score. You think it is a big deal that you get a "4". The scores, as they relate to insurance rates, are in a range. So a community scoring a "4" gets the same rate as a community scoring a "6". As I recall it something like 1-3, 4-6, 7-9 and above nine is basically a NR.
 
incognito said:
And then the actual ISO score. You think it is a big deal that you get a "4". The scores, as they relate to insurance rates, are in a range. So a community scoring a "4" gets the same rate as a community scoring a "6". As I recall it something like 1-3, 4-6, 7-9 and above nine is basically a NR.
Click to expand...
Lower scores are "better". I think we get a 99. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top