7 ms·

I like your parent's explanation of why screws are not allowed by code in some places and also saying that yes, screws actually can be used, if you use the righ

I like your parent's explanation of why screws are not allowed by code in some places and also saying that yes, screws actually can be used, if you use the right ones, even if they aren't allowed by code in some places. I really like that because just mentioning code doesn't do any good. Just because code says something doesn't mean that it makes sense. There's tons of omissions in codes or stuff that is unnecessarily restrictive or way not enough to be safe. Screws are the perfect example. If code forbids screws but you are going to use the proper screws that are (with good reason) allowed in other jurisdictions that has a completely different vibe to it than someone blogging about using dry wall screws to frame a house. One is a safety concern and why inspections are a good thing, while another is a minor case of ignoring code without any concerns and where an inspection would suck (if you were the homeowner doing some work yourself). If they want to use something that is more expensive and let's them do something themselves that they wouldn't be able to do at all if they had to use nails, more power to them! Change code to allow the right type of screws! Your second part of the reply does the same, it sort of explains why you think it's a bad idea (and I agree that it is for various reasons). Could you explain why it is not a good idea to overlap roof lines?

hinkley 5y ago
Overlapping rooflines allow you to make a “detached” building that is functionally an addition to your house. The downside is that if you want to build a breezeway to a detached garage you’re going to have to get permits to do that. It sucks but otherwise you get people who make a long narrow house that’s a series of rooms that were built over time, and never inspected. You may see properties that have three fairly large but separate buildings, this is often someone skirting building codes in such a way that they stay within the letter of the law.
- hamburglar 5y ago
  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 hanging over my garage by about 6 inches. So far, the only practical downside is that my downspout ends up getting all the water from half of his roof, which means the problem is worse if I don’t keep it clear. Not a terribly big problem in my book, since I have to keep it clear anyway. What else am I missing? (Note: there are other things that are suboptimal about my garage, namely that it was built 100 years ago right on the property line and when it was rebuilt sometime later, it was allowed to stay there despite normally having a 5 foot setback requirement. As a result, this concrete block structure itself actually serves as part of the retaining wall and has moisture seepage issues from the uphill side. I actually think having the neighbor’s outbuilding covering that patch of land and managing the rainwater via my downspout helps the matter, because the ground between them gets no rainfall at all.)
  - hinkley 5y ago
    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.
    - throwaway9870 5y ago
      No physics problem? I consider a fully equipment fireman carrying a person trying to squeeze between the house and the shed to be a physics problem. And yes, those situations are considered when codes are written.
      - hinkley 5y ago
        Very true. The best I could come up with was humidity control, but ingress/egress issues make fire marshals demonstrably cranky.
    - hamburglar 5y ago
      So you think my garage is fine? Seeking anonymous expert-sounding internet validation :D
      - ethbr0 5y ago
        The thing to remember about building codes is that they're one solution to a problem. More often than not, one good solution. That isn't to say they're the only solution. So for new construction or reno, absolutely follow code! Why not? But for old construction that doesn't have obvious dangers and has served its purpose across decades? Why fix what ain't broke? It's entirely possibly it's a perfectly viable alternative solution.
    - horsawlarway 5y ago
      The water management issue is a bigger deal in some locations. In the original post, he's sloped the new roof back towards the house - huge issue where I live (Atlanta - we got a lot of heavy rain) since that's going to cause water entry in the basement or erosion on the foundation. It can also be a fire hazard in many situations. Ex - in my area there's a mandated 10ft gap between the property line and any structure. It's there to prevent people from building right up to the property line, essentially creating townhomes, but with none of the fire/safety planning those require. All that said - I agree with you, this code is likely there to discourage people trying to skirt around inspections (and because it's easy to spot).
- tharkun__ 5y ago
  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 other rules should be put in place and inspections should become less expensive, easier to get done etc. Basically make it easier and less of a problem for people to get inspected. You will still get people that won't do one of course. Make it possible to inspect them anyway. Of course I understand that there are conflicting priorities at work here too. Meaning funding. The optimal way for everyone would be quite expensive. So we get suboptimal solutions that are sometimes "OK" to circumvent and sometimes not. Here the bylaws for example allow one main structure, a shed and a detached garage (even if you have an attached one already). No need for roof overhang code stuff. The intent of the bylaw is also much more clear. The guy in the article arguably is creating such a detached building. He is also in violation of rules about how far structures have to be from the property line assuming the rules in his place are like here and that fence is towards the neighbors.
  - ketzo 5y ago
    > 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 sure I'm not gonna fuckin' kill somebody? Yes! Give me that!
    - sokoloff 5y ago
      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.
respondo2134 5y ago
It also looks like from the single angle shown here that the shed roof is pitched towards the house, so any water is going to be channeled towards the foundation. This is a terrible idea.
sjs382 5y ago
https://fs.blog/chestertons-fence/ https://fs.blog/chestertons-fence/

hinkley 5y ago

Overlapping rooflines allow you to make a “detached” building that is functionally an addition to your house. The downside is that if you want to build a breezeway to a detached garage you’re going to have to get permits to do that. It sucks but otherwise you get people who make a long narrow house that’s a series of rooms that were built over time, and never inspected. You may see properties that have three fairly large but separate buildings, this is often someone skirting building codes in such a way that they stay within the letter of the law.

hamburglar 5y ago
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 hanging over my garage by about 6 inches. So far, the only practical downside is that my downspout ends up getting all the water from half of his roof, which means the problem is worse if I don’t keep it clear. Not a terribly big problem in my book, since I have to keep it clear anyway. What else am I missing? (Note: there are other things that are suboptimal about my garage, namely that it was built 100 years ago right on the property line and when it was rebuilt sometime later, it was allowed to stay there despite normally having a 5 foot setback requirement. As a result, this concrete block structure itself actually serves as part of the retaining wall and has moisture seepage issues from the uphill side. I actually think having the neighbor’s outbuilding covering that patch of land and managing the rainwater via my downspout helps the matter, because the ground between them gets no rainfall at all.)
- hinkley 5y ago
  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.
  - throwaway9870 5y ago
    No physics problem? I consider a fully equipment fireman carrying a person trying to squeeze between the house and the shed to be a physics problem. And yes, those situations are considered when codes are written.
    - hinkley 5y ago
      Very true. The best I could come up with was humidity control, but ingress/egress issues make fire marshals demonstrably cranky.
  - hamburglar 5y ago
    So you think my garage is fine? Seeking anonymous expert-sounding internet validation :D
    - ethbr0 5y ago
      The thing to remember about building codes is that they're one solution to a problem. More often than not, one good solution. That isn't to say they're the only solution. So for new construction or reno, absolutely follow code! Why not? But for old construction that doesn't have obvious dangers and has served its purpose across decades? Why fix what ain't broke? It's entirely possibly it's a perfectly viable alternative solution.
  - horsawlarway 5y ago
    The water management issue is a bigger deal in some locations. In the original post, he's sloped the new roof back towards the house - huge issue where I live (Atlanta - we got a lot of heavy rain) since that's going to cause water entry in the basement or erosion on the foundation. It can also be a fire hazard in many situations. Ex - in my area there's a mandated 10ft gap between the property line and any structure. It's there to prevent people from building right up to the property line, essentially creating townhomes, but with none of the fire/safety planning those require. All that said - I agree with you, this code is likely there to discourage people trying to skirt around inspections (and because it's easy to spot).
tharkun__ 5y ago
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 other rules should be put in place and inspections should become less expensive, easier to get done etc. Basically make it easier and less of a problem for people to get inspected. You will still get people that won't do one of course. Make it possible to inspect them anyway. Of course I understand that there are conflicting priorities at work here too. Meaning funding. The optimal way for everyone would be quite expensive. So we get suboptimal solutions that are sometimes "OK" to circumvent and sometimes not. Here the bylaws for example allow one main structure, a shed and a detached garage (even if you have an attached one already). No need for roof overhang code stuff. The intent of the bylaw is also much more clear. The guy in the article arguably is creating such a detached building. He is also in violation of rules about how far structures have to be from the property line assuming the rules in his place are like here and that fence is towards the neighbors.
- ketzo 5y ago
  > 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 sure I'm not gonna fuckin' kill somebody? Yes! Give me that!
  - sokoloff 5y ago
    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.

respondo2134 5y ago

It also looks like from the single angle shown here that the shed roof is pitched towards the house, so any water is going to be channeled towards the foundation. This is a terrible idea.

sjs382 5y ago

https://fs.blog/chestertons-fence/ https://fs.blog/chestertons-fence/