Why building codes should be abolished

[Chock Full o Nuts]

In my view, that makes you a "arts cannon" instead of someone who knows how to troubleshoot.

Oh, I troubleshoot just fine, but thanks for the insult.

You cost your clients too much money.

By putting in the breakers required by code? I'm not talking about swapping out breaker after breaker. Talking about what it costs in breakers period.
Hell, larger home I recently did probably had close to 2k in breakers.

The "nuisance trips" are showing there is some other problem that needs fixed.

No, the nuisance trips are detecting a 'problem' that isn't really a problem, such as certain appliances/equipment/devices.
Seen my share of it.

Two of note would be not long ago, a brand new Wolf gas range that would trip the arc fault as soon as you went to fire it up. Just that outlet and hood on brand new circuit, and all good. Have had other gas ranges/cooktops with no issues. But this particular appliance/breaker combo said 'problem!' when no problem..
It's supposed to spark!

Other, years back was a new front loader washer on a new dedicated circuit. Tripped arc. Owner thought the laundry was done, only to open door and dump water on floor. Not a damn thing wrong with circuit from start to end. Bye bye AFCI. Been years and house still standing.

Guess you could go with Leviton panel and 'smart breakers', and keep updating your breakers.

The problem arises when an appliance or load is plugged into an outlet and its’ electrical signature is misinterpreted as an arc by the AFCI and the AFCI by design cuts power. Hence, nuisance trips. To address this problem, manufacturers of AFCI devices test many appliances known to cause tripping and record their electrical signature. That signature is logged into the memory of the AFCI device so it knows not to trip when that appliance is used.
This is all good and theoretically solves the problem, however what happens when a new appliance is introduced to the market after the AFCI device was installed?

Understanding AFCI (Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupter) Challenges and Addressing Nuisance Tripping

The National Electrical Code® (NEC®) has required Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupters in residential and limited commercial applications for many years, and they seem to expand requirements for every new Code cycle. There are receptacle based and circuit breaker based solutions.

blog.leviton.com

 

[aociswundumho]

instead of having to sift through garbage in search of something edible.

There are homeless people today who eat food found in dumpsters. Should they be arrested because it's "unsafe"?

 

[Lord of Planar]

What I was trying to get at, was your question about how the reduced cost of heating and cooling should be factored in. I believe that should be up to the purchaser/owner.

I agree. But you have to remember that we have liberal authoritarians demanding a fight of climate change. and requiring homes to use less energy.

I recently replaced the HVAC system here. I had choices from less efficient to state of the art maximum efficiency. The most efficient were categorically more expensive. I had decisions to make about how much I wanted to spend now to gain some savings down the road.

Other factors to consider is the temperature range they need to operate under. I don't see how systems should be dramatically different in efficiency, but that extra 1% can be expensive, like what they try tom do with car CAFE standards.

My place has a heat pump for heating and cooling. It works surprising well at the 15 F we had last winter. Some heat pump systems do not heat well at that low of a range.

 

[aociswundumho]

who benefits. The homeowner.

The homeowner does not benefit from being forced to spend his money to buy things he does not want.

Whatever house you are currently living in, unless it is brand new, it will not meet code. If I were to force you to upgrade your electrical and plumbing systems, you would have a better house, but it would make you much worse off. How do I know? Because otherwise you would have done it on your own before I got there.

Depending on the remodel / upgrade can increase home value, lower insurance, lower energy costs. etc.

If that benefited the homeowner, then they would do it on their own without state coercion.

Now, explain again why removing all building codes is a good thing?

Removing government control over housing (codes, zoning, nimbyism, etc) would:

1) Drastically increase the supply of housing.

2) Young people starting out would be able to afford a home, just like they could in the 50s

3) It would drastically reduce rents, making landlords much worse off.

4) Housing would no longer be seen as an investment, because prices would go down instead of up.

After all you seem to support the concept of buyer beware.

Yes, whereas you support the idea that the state is your mommy, and citizens are ignorant children to be coddled and protected from making their own decisions.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Oh, I troubleshoot just fine, but thanks for the insult.

By putting in the breakers required by code? I'm not talking about swapping out breaker after breaker. Talking about what it costs in breakers period.
Hell, larger home I recently did probably had close to 2k in breakers.

No, the nuisance trips are detecting a 'problem' that isn't really a problem, such as certain appliances/equipment/devices.
Seen my share of it.

Two of note would be not long ago, a brand new Wolf gas range that would trip the arc fault as soon as you went to fire it up. Just that outlet and hood on brand new circuit, and all good. Have had other gas ranges/cooktops with no issues. But this particular appliance/breaker combo said 'problem!' when no problem..
It's supposed to spark!

Other, years back was a new front loader washer on a new dedicated circuit. Tripped arc. Owner thought the laundry was done, only to open door and dump water on floor. Not a damn thing wrong with circuit from start to end. Bye bye AFCI. Been years and house still standing.

Guess you could go with Leviton panel and 'smart breakers', and keep updating your breakers.

Understanding AFCI (Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupter) Challenges and Addressing Nuisance Tripping

The National Electrical Code® (NEC®) has required Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupters in residential and limited commercial applications for many years, and they seem to expand requirements for every new Code cycle. There are receptacle based and circuit breaker based solutions.

blog.leviton.com

I see problems quite frequently in electronics from connection points getting old. In the case of the arc protection, it takes very little resistance to cause problems. These should be easy to find, and it is seldom a new power signature.

Like you said in the post I responded to. "Only takes a milliamp imbalance to cause a trip." If you ask me, a milliamp is allowing too much. This does indicate a resistive problem rather than an AFCI problem.

 

[RF667799]

The constitutionality is why guns can’t be more regulated in the name of safety.

Yes. I work in the insurance industry. Specific dog breeds are ineligible to be covered by most home insurance carriers.

I
That isn't what is meant by banning.

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

There are homeless people today who eat food found in dumpsters. Should they be arrested because it's "unsafe"?

Of course not. Food safety regulations are imposed on distributors, rather than consumers.

If a restaurateur is digging food out of dumpsters and serving it in their restaurant, for example, that restaurant should absolutely be shut down.

 

[aociswundumho]

Of course not. Food safety regulations are imposed on distributors, rather than consumers.

If a restaurateur is digging food out of dumpsters and serving it in their restaurant, for example, that restaurant should absolutely be shut down.

Suppose the restaurant charges one penny to homeless people for access to the dumpster. Would you shut them down, thereby making the homeless people worse off?

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

Suppose the restaurant charges one penny to homeless people for access to the dumpster. Would you shut them down, thereby making the homeless people worse off?

I might just fine them and then put the fine revenue towards a more robust SNAP program so that folks wouldn't need to be dumpster diving to begin with.

Shutting them down also wouldn't make the homeless people worse off though. The demand would be diverted to restaurants that don't charge anything for dumpster access, thereby lowering food costs for those homeless people.

They will also have an abandoned restaurant to squat in until a new business that is more willing to abide by our laws moves in.

 

[aociswundumho]

Shutting them down also wouldn't make the homeless people worse off though.

Of course it would. You are reducing the amount of food they have access to. Nobody who truly cares about the homeless population would do that.

 

[AConcernedCitizen]

Of course it would. You are reducing the amount of food they have access to. Nobody who truly cares about the homeless population would do that.

You aren't reducing it at all. There are still going to be just as many folks needing to eat, so the dumpster across the street will have more food, and they won't even have to pay for access.

 

[Michael Cole]

Building codes represent nothing but the personal preferences of the people who write them, based on subjective values rather than objective principles. There is no one right answer, it's all about trade-offs.

For example, suppose the building code in your climate mandates R20 for wall insulation. This number is not based on any objective scientific principle. Generally, the more you spend now on insulation and air-sealing, the lower your fuel bills will be later. But allocating more upfront for insulation means sacrificing resources that could have been used elsewhere. There are no free lunches, only trade-offs. Ultimately, the decision comes down to the values of the person making it.

You say, "But R20 is reasonable." No it isn't. Reasonable means based on reason, and there is no reason why R20 would be the ideal standard for millions of different homeowners, all with unique preferences and circumstances. Homeowners who would naturally choose R20 on their own are no better off for being forced to comply. Meanwhile, those who would prefer a different approach are made worse off. What justifies the state overriding their choices? The argument that it’s for the "common good" doesn't work when the primary beneficiaries of such mandates are insulation manufacturers—not homeowners.

Although this example focuses on insulation, the same reasoning applies to every aspect of home construction. Since building codes make no homeowners better off, and make millions of homeowners worse off, they should be abolished.

Yeah, and for multi-family construction, let's rid ourselves of those pesky 5 over 1 requirements. Hell, let 'em build a 100-story building out of 2 x 4's. Cheap Canadian 2 x 4's.

 

[Michael Cole]

Over half of the nation's housing stock is over 50 years old. Do all of you support forcing these homeowners to upgrade their "unsafe" homes to comply with the current building code?

Just curious. Do you oppose zoning restrictions as well?

 

[Gordy327]

Yeah, and for multi-family construction, let's rid ourselves of those pesky 5 over 1 requirements. Hell, let 'em build a 100-story building out of 2 x 4's. Cheap Canadian 2 x 4's.

Because what can possibly go wrong, am I right?

 

[Gordy327]

Just curious. Do you oppose zoning restrictions as well?

I'd say offhand, if it has anything to do with the government in some form, then yes.

 

[Gordy327]

Suppose the restaurant charges one penny to homeless people for access to the dumpster. Would you shut them down, thereby making the homeless people worse off?

No surprise you fail to see the distinction between someone serving patrons and some one serving themselves

 

[aociswundumho]

Just curious. Do you oppose zoning restrictions as well?

Strongly.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

Building codes represent nothing but the personal preferences of the people who write them, based on subjective values rather than objective principles. There is no one right answer, it's all about trade-offs.

For example, suppose the building code in your climate mandates R20 for wall insulation. This number is not based on any objective scientific principle. Generally, the more you spend now on insulation and air-sealing, the lower your fuel bills will be later. But allocating more upfront for insulation means sacrificing resources that could have been used elsewhere. There are no free lunches, only trade-offs. Ultimately, the decision comes down to the values of the person making it.

You say, "But R20 is reasonable." No it isn't. Reasonable means based on reason, and there is no reason why R20 would be the ideal standard for millions of different homeowners, all with unique preferences and circumstances. Homeowners who would naturally choose R20 on their own are no better off for being forced to comply. Meanwhile, those who would prefer a different approach are made worse off. What justifies the state overriding their choices? The argument that it’s for the "common good" doesn't work when the primary beneficiaries of such mandates are insulation manufacturers—not homeowners.

Although this example focuses on insulation, the same reasoning applies to every aspect of home construction. Since building codes make no homeowners better off, and make millions of homeowners worse off, they should be abolished.

This is absolute nonsense.

Building codes save lives. They set minimal standards for construction to make buildings safer from earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes.

They make sure builders don’t cut corners to increase profits over care for life.

Can there be over regulation? There can be over anything. Does that mean there should be no regulation. That’s just plain nuts. We have them because there is a legitimate need of them.

 

[Michael Cole]

Because what can possibly go wrong, am I right?

Indeed. I don't know where the OP lives, but around here, the new multi-family units offer rooftop lounges. It would seem "party with your friends on the roof" is more attractive than "beware of loose wires."



New and expensive right across from the ballpark. Very nice. Everybody happy.

Apartments for Rent in Reno, NV | Ballpark Apartments

Find your perfect home at Ballpark, offering spacious apartments for rent in Reno, NV. Experience luxurious amenities and a community that feels like family.

ballpark-apartments.com

OP? You got something against these apartment buildings?

 

[Michael Cole]

Strongly.

Lol. Good luck!!! I hope a tire factory doesn't set up shop next door. I would hate for your property to lose all its value.

Will it be everyone to himself at rush hour? No traffic studies, no infrastructure requirements.

Jakarta. Bon voyage!!!

 

[Gordy327]

Indeed. I don't know where the OP lives, but around here, the new multi-family units offer rooftop lounges. It would seem "party with your friends on the roof" is more attractive than "beware of loose wires."

Or the roof itself collapsing to begin with.

Lol. Good luck!!! I hope a tire factory doesn't set up shop next door. I would hate for your property to lose all its value.

Will it be everyone to himself at rush hour? No traffic studies, no infrastructure requirements.


Jakarta. Bon voyage!!!

Yeah, some people clearly do not think things through (or at all) when they protest things like zoning, building codes, or whatever. It's like some irrational fear/hatred of the government. Or just plain insanity.

 

[Michael Cole]

Or the roof itself collapsing to begin with.

Ironically and tragically, the site of the new apartments is where the old Mizpah Hotel burned down, killing four.

Your 2 Cents: Plaque memorializing Mizpah Hotel

The plaque was temporarily removed during construction of the new Ballpark Apartments in the area.

www.2news.com

The arsonist is serving time. The age of the building surely played a role in how quickly the fire spread. There's a commemorative plaque on the new building.

Yeah, some people clearly do not think things through (or at all) when they protest things like zoning, building codes, or whatever. It's like some irrational fear/hatred of the government. Or just plain insanity.

Yes, an irrational fear of being told what to do.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Building codes represent nothing but the personal preferences of the people who write them, based on subjective values rather than objective principles. There is no one right answer, it's all about trade-offs.

For example, suppose the building code in your climate mandates R20 for wall insulation. This number is not based on any objective scientific principle. Generally, the more you spend now on insulation and air-sealing, the lower your fuel bills will be later. But allocating more upfront for insulation means sacrificing resources that could have been used elsewhere. There are no free lunches, only trade-offs. Ultimately, the decision comes down to the values of the person making it.

You say, "But R20 is reasonable." No it isn't. Reasonable means based on reason, and there is no reason why R20 would be the ideal standard for millions of different homeowners, all with unique preferences and circumstances. Homeowners who would naturally choose R20 on their own are no better off for being forced to comply. Meanwhile, those who would prefer a different approach are made worse off. What justifies the state overriding their choices? The argument that it’s for the "common good" doesn't work when the primary beneficiaries of such mandates are insulation manufacturers—not homeowners.

Although this example focuses on insulation, the same reasoning applies to every aspect of home construction. Since building codes make no homeowners better off, and make millions of homeowners worse off, they should be abolished.

That isn’t generally true. Most building codes are based on improving the safety and/or durability of buildings, which makes not only their current occupants more safe, but their neighbors as well.

Your example is the exception rather than the rule, where building codes are designed to improve the efficiency of a building, presumably to conserve or limit the waste of some public utility.

I can agree that some are simply for the sake of appearance, but those tend to be local and are most commonly implemented by HOAs.

 

[ttwtt78640]

While we are at it get rid of licencing for electricians and plumbers , what can go wrong

Actually, plenty if the use of ‘approved’ (often union) trade personnel is the basis for not having their work inspected.

 

[Michael Cole]

Strongly.

Let's try this from a positive angle.

Maximum industrial. No homes within 10 miles. Commute time 15 to 30 minutes.

This is as close to no government interference as you're gonna get.

• The vast majority of industrial uses are pre-approved; rarely are special use permits ever required
• Grading permits issued within 7 days of application
• Building permits issued within 30 days of application
  Yes, you read that right! Just imagine, you could have your site graded, built and open for business within 180 days following close of escrow.
• Roads and all utilities (power, gas, fiber, water, wastewater, reclaimed water) are in place and built for industrial capacity
• A Berkshire Hathaway owned power plant is in the park with a capacity of 1100 megawatts
• Ample water rights secured and banked
• 12 Miles of dedicated frontage on the I-80 corridor and Union Pacific Intercontinental rail line, which is the central logistics corridor to and from the east coast
• Located in Nevada where there is ZERO state income tax!
• All land in the development is owned free and clear

This is how you attract industry leading companies. Not with "everything goes." All these buildings pass inspection, are safe, environmentally conscious and companies make profits. It's the American way. Anarcho-capitalism is just that. Anarchy. It doesn't work.