281–290 of 323 posts
Why is running ethernet and power in the same conduit bad? Other than for possibly signal interference for the data? I would love a general book recommendation, if it exists, for "common construction codes ELI5". It would be better for helpful best practices to be accessible and easily comprehensible rather than be bound up in some municipal website.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is exactly the reason I asked for reasoning. A perfect example of a specific reason for something in code where depending on what you are doing yourself you can safely ignore the code violation (except for the legality part). If the reason you gave is indeed the reason and only reason. I would argue that if inspections for safety reasons are why this is in code then code needs to remove this restriction and othe…
> Basically make it easier and less of a problem for people to get inspected Totally agreed, and this post is the perfect example of why: people should want to be inspected! The whole point of a city building code is to have rules to keep people safe in situations that aren't obvious to, e.g., the DIY shed-builder. If I'm building a shed in the backyard, and I have the opportunity to call an employed expert to make s…
Some elements are for safety. Some elements are aesthetic: give the town a coherent look and feel. Some elements are economic: promote property value, ban what could be seen as ugly or low class. Some elements regulate interactions between neighboring lots: setbacks, placement of windows, rules for fences and trees, limits on combining adjoining properties. Some elements serve redistributive or consumer protection goals: minimum dwelling sizes and features, standards for light and air. Some elements seek to curate the community's demographics. Obviously we regulate plumbing for safety and sanitation reasons. We also regulate plumbing to prevent illegal second kitchens, which could bring renters or multigenerational (immigrant) households into homes meant for affluent (white) nuclear families.
It is multifaceted, overlapping (safety at all costs? or find a way to price out the dirty poors and blame it on safety?), and different people at different times may be intentionally lying or genuinely confused about the intentions behind and effects of different rules. And that's just in theory. In practice there are whole other layers regarding what goes on at the permit counter, in variance/discretionary review hearings, and in day to day enforcement operations.
Not that anything about this shed is built to code, but this takes the cake: > PRO TIP Use screws for everything; if you mess up, remove the screws and redo it; with nails, it’s a lot harder to do that. You absolutely should not do this for framing, and most building codes specify the type and size of nails that you must use when fastening load-bearing structural components. Screws are convenient, sure, but they are…
I think a bunch of folks need to get off their high horses about "building codes" and sort out their perspective. Sure nails might be the correct thing for a much larger structure, but for this piddly wee thing, who cares? If there's an earthquake then the adjacent house is likely to flatten this box regardless of fasteners used.
My only concern would be the electrical and that they'd hooked up a separate breaker for the "crate supply". Yes defo make sure that's correct.
But....It's just a shed
Not that anything about this shed is built to code, but this takes the cake: > PRO TIP Use screws for everything; if you mess up, remove the screws and redo it; with nails, it’s a lot harder to do that. You absolutely should not do this for framing, and most building codes specify the type and size of nails that you must use when fastening load-bearing structural components. Screws are convenient, sure, but they are…
Wow. Just wow. Not gonna pollute with comments about it that others have already made. I will add that I am making electrical/gas renovations to the house/detached garage. Basically we are adding LP to the house for my new range, and a gas water heater. Also ran gas to the garage for powering a genset. The past year or so has taught me the import of off grid solutions for certain things like cooking and hot water. So…
Is the roof slanted in the right direction? You are sending the water toward your house instead of away from it. This might create drainage problems in flash flood conditions.
Also in the UK it's against regulation to have a wooden structure so close to a residential property... Although this is the US where most properties are made of wood... So probably no such rule?
Each member country of the UK have their own different planning regulations - Scotland, England, Wales and NI. Also please cite where having a shed next to your property is illegal in any one of these jurisdictions. Under certain dimensions and heights, planning "law" doesn't apply.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’d be happy to have projects inspected. If the inspection only cost a modest fee covered by the permit. Instead, permits are a way to find ways to raise assessments and therefore property taxes. Given the recurring costs, it’s no surprise at all that a lot of work is done without inspections.
Permits are for both safety _and_ tax reasons. Adding outbuildings to your property increases the value, so you should have your taxes increased, by the same logic that people with more expensive houses should pay more in taxes than people with cheaper houses. And property taxes, if properly codified and enforced, are a good way to ensure rich people can’t avoid taxes by hiding it in real estate. They also incentiviz…
I could easily see (and probably agree with) the argument that we should be taxing land and not improvements. It feels a bit unfair to spend time and money to improve your own land, not be able to realize any gain/income from that improvement until you sell it, but meanwhile be on the hook for extra taxes every year.
To be clear, I think property taxes (or land-value taxes) are reasonable: desirable land is a scarce resource, and we should ensure landowners are doing productive things with it. But the current assessment process leaves much to be desired IMO. (And that's without even getting into California's Prop 13 nonsense.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
allthe "this is not to code" comments i guess
Bikeshedding is arguing about stuff that doesn't matter (ex: color). Pointing out that something is built dangerously is not bikeshedding.
Well in many jurisdictions the size of this thing (a shed) wouldn't matter, so yes it is bikeshedding. And this thing looks like it's built well enough to be a shed you can go and sit in with a laptop, a nice cup of tea and a biscuit. The overreaction here by HN to this ancient project perhaps explains why we end up with maddeningly overly complex systems to just stick a bloody simple webpage in a website.
I hate to be a bore, but.. did zoning come into play? I know a place that had to tear theirs down once the city found out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This still doesn’t explain why overlapping rooflines are actually problematic, though. I have always wondered this myself, as I actually own a house with a detached garage where the previous owner and next door neighbor put an easement on file that allowed the next door neighbor (whose ground level is about 5 feet higher via a retaining wall) to build an outbuilding very close to the property line with the roofline h…
It’s a “this is why we can’t have nice things” situation. There’s no physics problem with overlapping that I know of, but it’s a giant loophole for people who are up to no good. It’s not so much that you shouldn’t be able to do it as that there’s no way we can do it without a permit.