3 ms·
Owned a half-dozen US houses built between 1907 and 2015 and have never actually seen such a thing. If you're lucky someone's done some work on a branch at some
by yamtaddle 4y ago
Owned a half-dozen US houses built between 1907 and 2015 and have never actually seen such a thing. If you're lucky someone's done some work on a branch at some point and was courteous enough to install a shut-off, though usually off somewhere weird where there was already damage or whatever, not where you'd normally look for it.
[EDIT] Actually, my parents' very-new house has that... but because it's all-PEX, so it's super-easy to install it that way, with a central panel full of shut-offs for various parts.
- mindslight 4y agoHah. I hadn't realized I was taking that for granted (over multiple houses myself), and just figured they were required by code (even though it makes the chrome sink shutoffs kind of redundant). Score 1 for DIYers doing more maintainable work than professionals. FWIW a SharkBite valve or NPT adapter into a valve would seem to be a handier thing to have around than a pure cap. For example, you can attach a valve without shutting the water off.
- yamtaddle 4y agoHell, maybe it is required by code in some places. I've only really looked at the plumbing of houses in a three-state cluster in the Midwest, maybe elsewhere more-conveniently-designed plumbing is normal.
- matwood 4y agoI had the main irrigation feed burst over Christmas and it's just a branch off the main line into the house with no valve! Had to turn the water off at the street, and couldn't fix it until the day after Christmas.
- jessaustin 4y agoHow did that setup pass a code inspection?!
- mindslight 4y agoMaybe they're not in an area where it freezes, so the main shutoff doesn't need to be inside the house, and there's no need to shut off and drain the silcock in the winter?
- jessaustin 4y agoLet's assume all that is true. Still, shit breaks, and all branches off the main have to be valved separately. With the current setup, contamination (e.g. by sewage) of a branch couldn't be isolated from the house. That is not acceptable.
- mindslight 4y agoI was the one who started the thread thinking that shutoffs on branches were the norm, and apparently that's just not the case everywhere. Also I don't know what you mean about sewage contamination? Sewage contamination of potable water lines would indicate a hugely weird problem. AFAIK backflow preventers (fancy check valves), which prevent water in the house from going back into the municipal distribution, are standard on new installs. But I think that requirement is recent as of the past few decades, so most houses aren't going to have them.
- jessaustin 4y agoI suppose that depends on the typical age of houses in your area? Just as supply lines inside houses might get contaminated, supply lines outside houses might get contaminated. Perhaps from sewage, perhaps from runoff, or whatever. Outside lines are more likely to be broken by sloppy excavation, for example. Simple isolation valves are sensible even in situations that don't require backflow preventers, such as on a private well.
- mindslight 4y agoI still don't really understand what you're saying. Yes, I agree isolation valves are good. But as far as what code requires? It seems that if isolation valves aren't required on branches, then the only isolation valve that is required is the main house valve that can isolate it from the street water main. So I can't figure out what else you think would have been required to pass inspection in the comment you originally responded to.