-
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.
Latest activity
-
Yes but here may not be any code requirements that need to be meant depending on when it was constructed -
Yeah, I agree with the above, a change either to R-1 or R-4, depending on if services are provided. Probably won't be a big deal though.
-
Joe.B replied to the thread Change of Use?.Yeah, I agree with the above, a change either to R-1 or R-4, depending on if services are provided. Probably won't be a big deal though. -
mtlogcabin replied to the thread Change of Use?.Yes but here may not be any code requirements that need to be meant depending on when it was constructed -
-
If they are not supervised, no....If they are receiving care...Maybe...But the doors would be permits anyway...
-
Mr. Inspector replied to the thread Wow....I'm a 3rd party inspector that works in multiple towns. Local amendments can be a big deal here since the state only requires a permit... -
I see the problem now... they need a vacuum breaker on that hose bib to prevent backflow. -
steveray replied to the thread Change of Use?.If they are not supervised, no....If they are receiving care...Maybe...But the doors would be permits anyway...
-
Let's say there's a regular apartment building. Looks like an apartment building, acts like an apartment building (residential use for...
-
BN4537 replied to the thread An average day.I see the problem now... they need a vacuum breaker on that hose bib to prevent backflow. -
Yup, to some degree, 104.10 for modifications, and 104.11 for AM&M, but always on a case-by-case basis.
-
I hate shingles <4/12....
