History
of the Building Codes
Many
people may ask, why do we need laws that tell
us what we can or cannot do with our own property?
One answer could be, that what any of us might
do or not do has an effect on other people and
it is for the benefit of others that we are required
to follow the law. In any event, we do have building
codes and there are penalties imposed upon us
if we don't follow them.
The
regulation of building construction is not a recent
phenomenon. It can be traced through recorded
history for over 4000 years. The great Babylonian
King Hammurabi, in 2000 BC instituted a performance-type
code which was based on the simple principle of
"an eye for an eye", where the Builder
was responsible "in kind" for any damages
that occurred due to the failure of the structure.
If the Building owner died as a result of a collapse,
then the Builder would be killed as restitution.
If the Building owner lost an arm as a result
of collapse, then the Builder would sacrifice
his arm.
Archeological
fragments of Greek and Roman laws give the first
evidence of buildings being required to be inspected
during construction. For example, the records
of a building being constructed by Socrates in
341 BC tell of the specific requirements:
"He
shall set the joints against each other, fitting,
and before inserting the dowels he shall show
the architect all the stones to be fitting, and
shall set them true and sound and dowel them with
iron dowels, two dowels to each stone…"
In
1189 AD, the Mayor of London, Henry Fitz-Elwyne,
issued an ordinance known as the "Assize
of Buildings." This ordinance was referred
to as a "planning act, " but contained
much on the construction of structures.
After
the plague and fire consumed much of the city
in 1664, Parliament enacted further building regulations
reflecting the growth in knowledge of building
technology. To enforce these "codes’ surveyors
were appointed and empowered with the authority
to invoke jail sentences on violators. Perhaps
this was the birthplace of the first building
inspector.
Back
to Top
In
early America, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson
encouraged the development of building regulations
to provide minimum standards that would ensure
health and safety. Today, most of the United States
is covered by a network of modern building regulations
ranging from fire and structural safety to health,
handicap accessibility and conservation of energy.
In
the early nineteen hundreds or about 1905, here
in the United States, one of the first building
codes was developed on the East Coast by the Fire
Underwriters Association intended to be a national
code and it was directed toward protecting the
building rather than the people in the building.
This building code was titled "National Building
Code." National codes directed toward the
safety of the occupants (fire exiting, fire alarms,
isolation of hazards) were not developed until
the 1930’s and 40’s.
Since
the early 1900s, the system of building regulations
in the United States was based on model building
codes developed by three regional model code groups.
The codes developed by the Building Officials
Code Administrators International (BOCA) were
used on the East Coast and throughout the Midwest
of the United States, while the codes from the
Southern Building Code Congress International
(SBCCI) were used in the Southeast and the codes
published by the International Conference of Building
Officials (ICBO) covered the West Coast. Although
regional code development has been effective and
responsive to the regulatory needs of the local
jurisdictions, by early 1990s it became obvious
that the country needed a single coordinated set
of national model building codes. The nation’s
three model code groups decided to combine their
efforts and in 1994 formed the International Code
Council (ICC) to develop codes that would have
no regional limitations.
After
three years of extensive research and development,
the first edition of the International Building
Code was published in 1997. The code was patterned
on three legacy codes previously developed by
the organizations that constitute ICC. By the
year 2000, ICC has completed the International
Codes series and ceased development of the legacy
codes in favor of their national successor.
Back
to Top
Legacy
Codes
o
BOCA National Building Code (BOCA/NBC)
by the Building Officials Code Administrators
International (BOCA)
o
Uniform Building Code (UBC) by the
International Conference of Building Officials
(ICBO)
o
Standard Building Code (SBC) by
the Southern Building Code Congress International
(SBCCI)
Competing
Codes
Notably
absent from the group of the IBC developers is
another large player in model code development,
the National Fire Protection Association. Initially,
NFPA joined ICC in a collective effort to develop
the International Fire Code (IFC). This effort
however fell apart at the completion of the first
draft of the document. Subsequent efforts by ICC
and NFPA to reach agreement on this and other
documents have been unsuccessful, resulting in
a series of disputes between the two organizations.
After several failed attempts to find common ground
with the ICC, NFPA has withdrawn from participation
in development of the International Codes and
joined with International Association of Plumbing
and Mechanical Officials (IAPMO), American Society
of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
Engineers (ASHRAE) and the Western Fire Chiefs
Association to create an alternative set of codes.
First published in 2002, the code set named the
Comprehensive Consensus Codes, or C3, includes
the NFPA 5000 building code as its centerpiece
and the companion codes such as the National Electrical
Code, NFPA 101 Life Safety Code, UPC, UMC, and
NFPA 1. Unlike the IBC, the NFPA 5000 conforms
to ANSI-established policies and procedures for
the development of voluntary consensus standards.
The NFPA's
move to introduce a competing building standard
has received strong opposition from powerful trade
groups such as the American Institute of Architects
(AIA), BOMA International and National Association
of Home Builders (NAHB). After unsuccessful attempts
to encourage peaceful cooperation and resolution
between NFPA and ICC on their codes disputes,
a number of organizations, including AIA, BOMA
and two dozen commercial real estate associations,
founded the Get It Together coalition, which repeatedly
urged NFPA to abandon code development and adoption
efforts related to NFPA 5000 and to work with
ICC to integrate the other NFPA codes and standards
into the ICC family of codes.
Unfortunately,
all efforts to save the development of the unified
set of model codes have failed, and both NFPA
and ICC began and are continuing to aggressively
push for adoption of their respective documents.
As a result of the unwillingness of the National
Fire Protection Association and the International
Code Council to cooperate on a single code, which
could have been uniformly applied throughout the
United States, the local governments and the nation's
construction and real estate industries find themselves
in the middle of the battle for code supremacy.
Notably,
California adopted the NFPA 5000 codes as a baseline
for the future California Building Code, but later
rescinded the decision and continued to use the
IBC. The main driver for this decision were increased
costs involved in training architects and engineers
to design for a new code, and the disparity that
a different code would cause between California
and the majority of other states which have adopted
IBC.
Back
to Top
Overview
A large
portion of the International Building Code deals
with fire prevention. It differs from the related
International Fire Code in that the IBC handles
fire prevention in regards to construction and
design and the fire code handles fire prevention
in an on-going basis. For example, the building
code would deal with location of exits with the
fire code keeping exits unblocked. The building
code also deals with access for the disabled and
structural stability (including earthquakes).
The International Building Code applies to all
structures in areas where it is adopted, except
for one and two family dwellings, which is well
covered in the International Residential Code.
Parts
of the code reference other codes including the
International Plumbing Code, the International
Mechanical Code, the National Electric Code, and
various National Fire Protection Association standards.
Therefore, if a municipality adopts the International
Building Code, it also adopts those parts of other
codes referenced by the IBC. Often, the plumbing,
mechanical, and electric codes are adopted along
with the building code.
The code
book itself totals over 700 pages and chapters
include:
- Building
occupancy classifications
- Building
heights and areas
- Interior
finishes
- Foundation,
wall, and roof construction
- Fire
protection systems (sprinkler system requirements
and design)
- Materials
used in construction
- Elevators
and escalators
- Already
existing structures
- Means
of egress (see below)
Means
of Egress
The phrase
"means of egress" refers to the ability
to exit the structure, primarily in the event
of an emergency, such as a fire or on the west
coast a seismic event. Specifically, a means of
egress is broken into three parts: the path of
travel to an exit, the exit itself, and the exit
discharge (the path to a safe area outside).
The code also address the number of exits required
for a structure based on its intended occupancy
use and the number of people who could be in the
place at one time as well as their relative locations.
It also deals with special needs, such as hospitals,
nursing homes, and prisons where evacuating people
may have special requirements. In some instances,
requirements are made based on possible hazards
(such as in industries) where flammable
or toxic chemicals will be in use. However, in
our field we deal mostly with residential occupancies.
Back
to Top
Existing
Structures
Building
code requirements generally apply to the construction
of new buildings and alterations or additions
to existing buildings, changes in the use of buildings,
and the demolition of buildings or portions of
buildings at the ends of their useful or economic
lives. As such, building codes obtain their effect
from the voluntary decisions of property owners
to erect, alter, add to, or demolish a building
in a jurisdiction where a building code applies.
Alterations
and additions to an existing building must usually
comply with all new requirements applicable to
their scope as related to the intended use of
the building. On the other hand, changes in the
use of a building often expose the entire building
to the requirement to comply fully with provisions
of the code applicable to the new use. Some jurisdictions
limit such application to matters of fire safety,
disabled access or structural integrity, others
apply an economic feasibility or practicality
test, and still others exempt buildings of special
use or architectural or historic significance.
Existing
buildings are not, however, exempt from new requirements,
especially those considered essential to achieve
health, safety or general welfare objectives of
the adopting jurisdiction, even when they are
not otherwise subject to alteration, addition,
change in use, or demolition. Such requirements
typically remedy existing conditions, considered
in hindsight, inimical to safety, such as the
lack of automatic fire sprinklers in certain places
of assembly, as became a major concern after the
Station nightclub fire in 2003 killed 100 people.
Although
such remedial enactments address existing conditions,
they do not violate the United States Constition's
ban on the adoption of ex post facto law, as they
do not criminalize or seek to punish past conduct.
Such requirements merely prohibit the maintenance
or continuance of conditions that would prove
injurious to a member of the public or the broader
public interest.
Assertions
by property rights advocates in the United States
that such requirements violate the "takings
clause" of the Fifth Amendment to the United
States Constitution, have generally failed on
grounds that compliance with such requirements
increases rather than decreases the capital value
of the property concerned.
Back
to Top
Some
states, especially those that delegate their adoption
and enforcement authority to subordinate local
jurisdictions, may exempt their own buildings
from compliance with local building codes or local
amendments to a statewide building code. Similarly,
property owned by the United States Government
is considered exempt from state and local enactments,
although such properties are generally not exempt
from inspection by state or local authorities,
except on grounds of protecting national defense
or national security. In lieu of submitting themselves
to compliance with the requirements of other government
jurisdictions, most state and federal agencies
adopt construction and maintenance requirements
that either reference model building codes or
model their provisions on their requirements.
Some
jurisdictions have enacted requirements to bring
certain types or uses of existing buildings into
compliance with new requirements, such as the
installation of smoke alarms in households or
dwelling units, at the time of sale. Some safety
advocates have suggested a similar approach to
encourage remedial application of other requirements,
but few jurisdictions have found it economical
or equitable to disincentivise property transactions
in this way.
Many
jurisdictions have found the application of new
requirements to old, particularly historic buildings,
challenging. California has also enacted a specific
historic building code (see 2001 California Historic
Building Code). Other states have also required
compliance with building and fire codes, subject
to reservations, limitations, or jurisdictional
discretion to protect historic building stock
as a condition of nominating or listing a building
for preservation or landmark status, especially
where such status attracts tax credits, investment
of public money, or other incentives.
Back
to Top
Updating
Cycle
Updated
editions of the IBC are published on a three year
cycle (2000, 2003, 2006…). This fixed schedule
has led other organizations, which produce referenced
standards, to align their publishing schedule
with that of the IBC. The 2007 California Building
Code (adopted 01-01-2008) is largely based on
the 2006 IBC.
Referenced
Standards
Model
building codes rely heavily on referenced standards
as published and promulgated by other standards
organizations such as ASTM (ASTM International),
ANSI (American National Standards Institute),
and NFPA (National Fire Protection Association).
The structural provisions rely heavily on referenced
standards, especially the Minimum Design Loads
for Buildings and Structures published by the
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE-7).
Until
2001, Texas (as a state) had not adopted a building
code but municipalities were and did adopt one of
the various building codes to guide their construction
and inspectors. In 2001 the State of Texas adopted the IBC codes, most specifically
the IRC (International Residential Code) and the
NEC (National Electric Code) for all areas of Texas.
Until this time, the unincorporated areas
of the State effectively had no code requirements.
This rule covers all of Texas.
Below
is an article on the history of building codes.
|
History of Building Codes
By Gregory J McFann, Building Official
City
of Alameda Planning & Building Department
Have you ever
wondered about the origin of building
codes? If you are like most people,
this question has never crossed your
mind. In fact you would probably be
hard pressed to name any building code
provisions. Yet the effects of building
codes are all around us. They regulate
many aspects of every building we live,
work, shop and play in. Building codes
regulate everything from stair size
to the number of plugs you need in your
kitchen. I know what you're thinking.
Building codes are just more government
regulation intruding into my privacy.
In fact, the development of today's
codes dates back almost 4000 years.
In that time, the focus has always been
on making buildings safe and sanitary
for their occupants. The enactment of
and revisions to codes are a direct
result of failures from existing building
techniques, often the trigger has been
a disaster that forces changes.
The earliest
building codes can be traced back to
The Code Of Hammurabi circa 1760 BC.
The Code of Hammurabi consisted of 282
laws written in cuneiform on an eight-foot
tall stone slab. The stone was displayed
in the public square for all to see.
Laws number 229 through 233 dealt with
building construction. Unlike today's
codes, the Code of Hammurabi dealt more
with the consequences of building failure
rather than how to safely construct
a building. For instance, Law #229 stated
"If a builder builds a house for
someone, and does not construct it properly,
and the house which he built falls and
kills its owner then the builder shall
be put to death." One would have
to imagine, with such dire consequences,
builders had to put a lot of care into
their work.
Various historic
texts include building code requirements.
Many of them outlined punishments for
faulty construction. The Bible contained
a code requirement that reads much more
like a modern building code. In Deuteronomy
Chapter 22 verse 8 a safety feature
is required based on past experience.
A builder is required "If thou
shouldest build a new house, then shalt
thou make a parapet to thy house; so
thou shalt not bring blood-guiltiness
upon thy house, if one should in any
wise fall from it."
Modern building
codes shifted from outlining the punishment
for poor construction to mandating requirements
that would make building safe and sanitary
to occupy. One early example of this
is found in the London Building Act
of 1844. Chief amongst the requirements,
of this set of codes, was the improvement
of drainage, securing of sufficient
width of streets to ensure adequate
ventilation, regulating explosive works
and regulation of "deleterious"
works. Each of these requirements came
out of a need to improve life safety
and was a result of seeing what didn't
work and making it better. The Act of
1844 also created the first building
inspectors when it required "the
appointment of officers to superintend
the Act".
The growth of
American cities fueled by the tremendous
influx of immigrants led to the creation
of huge apartment buildings called tenements.
Tenement living conditions in the mid
1800's were barely tolerable. As a result,
in 1867, the City of New York enacted
the First Tenement Housing Act, which
required fire escapes and a window for
every room. The requirements of the
Second Tenement Housing Act, enacted
in 1879, included the installation of
toilets inside the building, and that
windows face a source of fresh air and
light, not an interior hallway. A third
tenement-housing act had to be passed
in 1901 to address failures of the first
two acts.
The first public
building code in California was the
1909 State Tenement Housing Act. Similar
to New York, California saw the need
to regulate housing construction to
assure safe and sanitary occupancy.
Among the initial requirements of the
California Act were minimum ceiling
heights, room sizes and the requirement
for heat. In 1927, the Pacific Coast
Building Officials published the first
Uniform Building Code. This code not
only addressed housing habitability
issues, it also regulated the construction
of all buildings. Included in some of
the initial requirements of the 1927
Uniform Building Code were building
setbacks, minimum exiting and minimum
safe structural requirements.
Today's building codes are built on the experience of the past. Each new
earthquake, fire, tornado, hurricane or
other natural disaster results in improved
codes for building construction. While
the complexity of the codes has increased
greatly since the Code of Hammurabi in
1760 BC what was true then is true today.
The intent of the building codes is to
provide better and safer buildings for
all of us to occupy.
Back
to Top
|
