> can you give me examples where fire codes are over-zealous?

There's a small movement to eradicate the requirement for midrise buildings to have 2 stairways. Advocates point to European regulations and claim that a single stairway is just as safe as 2.

Double stairways, they say, makes construction more expensive and results in awkward, undesirable apartment layouts.

https://slate.com/business/2021/12/staircases-floor-plan-twi...

Yes, I suspect this rule will be removed more and more as the housing crisis continues across first world metros.

Many European regulations on fire safety are pretty stringent in other areas too that equally run up costs. Also certain buildings require two staircases but scissor staircases are permitted.

I remember a commentator in a previous thread mentioned something like...

'In NY "Fire-Proof" buildings can be built like that', when they're built out of materials that do not burn and in ways where the fire cannot spread. Effectively the safer place in a fire, in theory, would be to shelter in place as it cannot spread.

I'm all for using as many non-burning materials as possible in building construction.

This to me sounds like another case of out of context "Europeans do this, so it must be better". From personal experience, the UK takes fire safety much more serious than the US: fire alarm tested every week, fire drills are made often and *for real*, fire doors everywhere, every kitchen has a fire blanket (not just an extinguisher), every building has 2 doors, every appliance has a plug with a fuse in the plug itself (btw, American plugs are a joke) etc.

Are you proposing to get rid of the second stairway alone, or are you going to bring all the other regulations too?

This the same UK that had a scandal a while back about a high-rise fire caused by idiotic external cladding materials? :-)

If breaking the regulations leads to prison for those responsible, it's working as best as it can.

(Legal cases, inquests etc continue.)

Prison time won't bring back any of the 72 people that died.

It never does, but what more could have been done?

The regulations existed and were illegally broken.

Maybe they could just put a fire pole or a rope on the other end.

It may not be as ideal as stairs, but if it's a backup option you'd think that'd be much less costly while still allowing at least a majority of people to escape.

US apartment buildings are much more likely to involve wood frame construction than EU apartment buildings.

I mean, it's possible for something to be simultaneously overzealous and not strict enough. If the code focuses on the wrong measures, it could end up putting unnecessary red tape, while completely failing to provide adequate safety.

I don't know enough about fire code to know whether it applies here.

It's often the case that this happens, because building/fire codes always balance cost as a part of the decision whether or not to require something... sometimes cheap things don't help much but we do them anyway because they're cheap. Sometimes expensive things would help a lot but we don't do them because it's prohibitively expensive.

Almost every city has a "the fire of XXXX", those no longer occur for a reason. And to state the obvious, that reason is fire codes.

Kitchen Sinks are required to have an outlet within 2 feet. I redid our kitchen and we ran into that issue. There were outlets on every corner of the island but all slightly farther than 2 feet away. Lucked out and our rough inspector let it slide. Finish inspector called it out but luckily they let it slide because the rough inspector let it slide. Theoretically they could have made me rip it all out.

Spooked me enough to make me not get permits for the next renos. Too many arbitrary rules that can make projects spiral without any real safety improvement.

That code is a mish-mash of a real safety thing (we don't regulate extension cords at all, so we try to make sure there are outlets everywhere and you don't need them... especially around water, like a sink!) and a general effort to make sure that if you buy a house, you don't figure out later that it's a piece of shit. My favorite examples are minimum length of extra wire in a box, and a neutral required. I don't think those have to do with safety at all, but holy crap am I glad they exist, as someone who didn't build their own house, or have my inspector take the covers off every box before we bought our current house.

Now, when you sell your house, is the next person gonna be a bit miffed that there are no outlets in the kitchen anywhere near the sink? What about when they go to install a smart outlet and there's no neutral, and 1cm of hot wire to work with? That's gonna suck too, but you didn't permit anything and went off your gut so... fuck them I guess?

Like I said, there's an outlet on every corner of the island about 2.5 feet from the sink. And on the other kitchen sink there's one immediately on each side. Nobody is getting fucked.

I'm more commenting on:

> Spooked me enough to make me not get permits for the next renos.

I have no idea what you're going to decide is up to your own personal code going forward.

This is the fun part about buying a house in a rural area with no real regulation enforcement. Part of the house is 70 years old. Another part is an addition built by a previous owner. Every maintenance item is a journey of adventure and discovery.

There's no less than three breaker panels in the house itself and it's never immediately clear which panel goes to which outlet/fixture/appliance.

I gave up installing a faucet in the kitchen and called a plumber. He cut the PVC monstrosity out from the cabinet and took it back to the shop to show his buddies.

You know that little drain line that comes from the AC to handle condensation? It is not a good idea to have the other end of it in the crawl space.

Given modern information presentation technology, every single limit like that in the codes should be linked to a document detailing why the limit is what it is, with a short summary and preferably videos of what happens when the limit is and is not adhered to.

I don’t doubt there are great reasons for most of the rules, and the best way to get compliance is to explain why they’re there. And some may be overzealous indeed and then they would hopefully be adjusted.

How is that a bad safety measure? if not close enough, people will use extension cords, which will be significantly more dangerous than proper outlets.

There's an outlet 2.5 feet away. No need for an extension cord.

Okay, what if it was 3 feet away? What about 3.5 feet away? At which point do they stop being overzealous?

From a top-level comment: Everyone - everyone - is certain that the codes are all overzealous and their little thing needs an exception.

You built something that wasn't to code and now you're sad that they told you that you did it wrong, but allowed it to stand because in their judgement it wasn't critical enough to have you rework it? The IRC is freely available, just read the code and follow it! It's dead simple. They even have pictures: https://cdn-codes-pdf.iccsafe.org/bundles/document/new_docum...

I don't understand your thought process in this situation at all.

Things worked out for you when you followed the rules, and because they worked out, you're not going to follow the rules in the future?

I lucked out that the first inspector was lazy and/or incompetent. He was there for 5 minutes and spent 4 of them chatting about his kid's baseball game. If I had the second inspector first he would have made me rework the design.

By "rework the design" you mean move one outlet six inches closer to the sink?

In my city, there is a required setback of 4' on all sides for solar panels to be installed on flat roofs... all flat roofs. I have a flat roof garage that is 12' x 24' and this law, which is ostensibly for large commercial flat roofs, is preventing me from putting more than 2 panels on my roof. This is the fire code.

It's not just for commercial buildings, it's requested by fire departments for homes too, and it's in the international fire code https://www.solarpowerworldonline.com/2018/04/know-your-code...

I agree that you could argue a garage should get an exemption if it's under X height and surface area. But otherwise, it seems like a sensible request.

Too bad, I was hoping solar garages and solar car ports would take over the world... Maybe if you build the roof out of structural solar panels.

The only one I can think of is the fire codes that require you to add a full sprinkler system to an existing house if you do any modifications to it.

Which means you do nothing and have no sprinklers.