Having lived in OKLA and TX all my life, I recently found out that many western states like CA and AZ require building inspections and codes even if your building your own house on your own rural property.
Now, to me, that is downright unamerican!
How do other states stack up in this regard? In OK and TX we can build anything we damn well please on our own rural property. Any inspectors that might come around probably would get their tail dusted with a little birdshot!
PlaneWood by Mike_in_Katy
PlaneWood
Replies
Most require, some actually check.
I found that in Northern Neck, Virginia you need a permit and inspection for just about every thing but a barn. You call it a barn and you're home free.
BJ
Well, what do you suppose happens when you sell your place? Don't you think the person buying your hand built shack deserves to know that it was built to a certain safe standard. I've done enough remodels on "homeowner builts" in states which were slack on building codes to know that having a code is in the best interests of all americans. Slipshod construction is un-american, not code compliance. Geez, the frontier closed decades ago.
Scott
Ah, yes, Scott, and then there's Japan, where the frontier closed, um, 1000 years ago ;-)
When we built our house (2x4) 8 years ago, we could've gotten away with just about anything, I think, given the total lack of inspections here. The "contractor" just lies on the building permit, and then does whatever he pleases. Like, he asserted he was putting in fireproof siding, per the Japanese "code," but what we got was Georgia Pacific OSB type siding, which actually burns pretty well, according to my limited experience. Our roofing, likewise, is asphalt shingles, but not the fireproof stuff supposedly required.
But it came cheap! (and the builder went bankrupt, and I spent two full years finishing it, etc.)
". . .and only the stump or fishy part of him remained."
Green Gables: A Contemplative Companion to Fujino Township
Edited 6/21/2002 6:55:32 AM ET by Norm in Fujino
People should have the right to build what they want how they want on their own land. Of course, anyone buying a home not built to code has a right to know, and then the decision to buy or not to buy rests with them. The sentiment "buyer beware" gets to the essence of capitalism. You're making it an argument of safety vs. freedom, and to red - blooded Americans everywhere, freedom always wins. It isnt the governments job to protect people that are too ignorant to find out for themselves if the house they're buying is code - compliant. Stupidity hurts, as well it should.
JALLEN9301, you state "It isnt the governments job to protect people that are too ignorant to find out for themselves if the house they're buying is code - compliant. Stupidity hurts, as well it should."
Have you ever thought about what happens to your house while you live in it? Have you ever given any thought about your wife dieing because your handy work did not live up to "the code." Worse yet, what if your child was seriously hurt and ended up loosing their arm or leg because you could not be bothered to build your house to the minimum standards.
Have you ever thought, I just hired this company to modify my house...gee whiz...I hope they did a good job....because the building code is stupid!!
The building code is there to protect you and all those who come after you. The building code sets the minimun standards. The inspectors are there to save the stupid people from themselves.
Peter
Peter,
I built my own house. I built it UBC compliant. It was never inspected, and it doesn't need to be. I took my time and did the job right. My wife and child are quite safe, thank you very much. Anyone who ever expresses an interest in buying my home will be duly informed of it's inspection status. If they still choose to buy it, they as FULLY INFORMED ADULTS claim all liabitilty for the house and anything that may happen to it.
We live in a society that assumes people who don't know how to build a house will be smart enough not to. While this doesn't always happen, and unfortunate accidents do occur as a result of some peoples ignorance, life cannot be made safe through more and more regulation. "Protecting people from themselves" is what dictators do. WE THE PEOPLE, Pete, are capable of deciding for ourselves and our children how best to conduct our affairs. I'm not saying that minimum standards of safety are bad, and shouldn't be available to people as guidelines to protect themselves. What i'm saying is that people have the right to own, build, and conduct business on their own private property without Big Daddy government looking over their shoulder.
Just a small comment on 'buyer beware' and openly telling people that a house was not inspected. Perhaps it might happen, but it's probably not reasonable for a buyer to have all of the studs, wiring and plumbing inspected in an existing house. That's why the inspections are done while it is being built.
While, the whole inspection process is bureaucratic and laced with problems and is frustrating and annoying. On the whole, it protects the general populace.
You can have freedom to do what you want to and by yourself and many people do. And as along as you do not ask for public services when those choices cause a problem then I have no problem with that. However, there are few places where a person can be that independent.
Before this escalates any further, I'd like to apologize to the readers and contributors of this forum for the defensive edge to my replies. The thing is, I live in central CA (Kern County). The two main industries here are agriculture and the oilfields, so we have a long tradition of rugged individualists. Farming in my family goes back three generations; although I am a welder by trade, I live in a rural area and am frequently called upon to pitch in on the ranch. I love my way of life, and thus tend to be a little ornery with my ideology, especially when I see the metropolitan areas to the north and south of me rapidly becoming the People's Republic of Californistan. But I didn't mean to turn this forum into a soapbox. I realize that this place is full of wiser heads than mine, and people's views have to be respected. That's all i'll say for now.
Ahh another true local. I think I have seniority, I'm sixth generation. I grew up in what used to be Northern California's farm land. My relatives grew and harvested hops in the rural western Sonoma County and later converted it to apples, prunes and peaches. I think there was also beans in there at some point. The ranch is still standing although we no longer own it. We also farmed in the Sacramento Valley, not sure what they grew there because I didn't spend much time on it. My great, great, great Grandfather was a trader, trapper, hunter and river boat owner along with being one of the founders of the City of Petaluma.
Yup, we've been here for a long time and have always kind of done things the way we wanted to but now its a different time. We don't have the kind of freedom we used to. We live in a kinder, gentler world today... In otherwords -
We can't just go out and shoot the bastards that rip us off any more. We have to waste our hard earned, left over after taxes income, taking them to damn court !
In order to take them to court we have to prove they have broken the law and in order to do that we have to set standards that define the legal limits of the law.
There's no need apologize for wanting to hang on to the few last remaining pockets of freedom that we have. Rural America is perfectly capable of continuing to govern itself and I agree that it must remain that way.
Steve - in Northern California
P.S. Did I forget to tell you the color of the back of my neck? Oh yeah, and my arms are tanned up only as far as my t-shirt sleeves.
Edited 6/25/2002 5:13:44 PM ET by Steve Schefer
Edited 6/25/2002 5:16:39 PM ET by Steve Schefer
Edited 6/25/2002 5:17:28 PM ET by Steve Schefer
Edited 6/25/2002 5:53:17 PM ET by Steve Schefer
What i'm saying is that people have the right to own, build, and conduct business on their own private property without Big Daddy government looking over their shoulder
You hit the nail on the head. Unfortunately, there are many who don't know enough/care enough to build a building safely. They're the reason we need codes. Why should my taxdollars go to put out a fire at an improperly constructed building.
Further, why would you have a problem showing an inspector what you did is to code and will last safely much longer than you will?? I would think the only ones not wanting inspections are those not building to code.
When people 100 years from now see my work, they'll know I cared. --Matt Mulka
It's really just the principle of the thing. I agree that contractors building tracts of houses need to be held accountable for their building practices. But that's quite different from me building my own home on 3 acres in the country. Now, as I stated earlier, I built my house UBC compliant. I would pass an inspection with flying colors. But I don't need another government organization sticking their nose into yet another area of my life. Yes, some people don't care enough to build a building properly. Those people deserve what they get. But the carelessness of a few does not give the government the right to step in and legislate to me what I may and may not do with my property and how I may or may not do it. A few bad apples do not spoil the fun for everyone in America. That logic works with kindergarteners. Our system of government is based on the premise that ordinary people are capable of choosing for themselves how best to conduct their affairs.
<Our system of government is based on the premise that ordinary people are capable of choosing for themselves how best to conduct their affairs.>
Ah, would that this were so. Both in theory and in practice.
Case in point, our Electorial College. Our founding fathers invented the Electoral College to choose a president for us because they believed that ordinary people were not capable of choosing for themselves how best to conduct their affairs.
Case in point. The Darwin awards. Alright,alright, maybe these ain't ordinary people. LOL
BJGardening, cooking and woodworking in Southern Maryland
The electoral college system was implemented for the purpose of giving the slave states equal representation in the electoral process. It was generally thought amongst the representatives for the southern colonies that if a direct election process were implemented, the more populous, abolitionist nothern colonies would have undue influence in electing a President. A reading of the Federalist Papers supports my assertion that the founding fathers had faith in the ability of citizens for self-governance.
I once added 1000 sq ft to my home in Tulsa. Since it was in the city limits, I had to follow code on all components.
The electrical inspector came out one day when I was at work. After looking over the job for 15 minutes, he asked my wife who did the wiring. She told him that I had done it. He said, "Oh!" and went back inspecting. After another 30 minutes he told my wife - "Well, I can't find anything wrong, so I guess I have to pass it." My wife then told him that I had a degree in Electrical Engineering. He said "Oh!" and left after tagging and signing the job.
Back then hardly anything would pass inspection if it was not done by a union man.
The major oil company that I worked for then had two non-union electricains on staff. The city came out and condemmed the lab buildings saying the building wiring was not up to code. The company immediately got a restraining order against the city. After months of trying to get the city to provide the list of non-code items, the CEO visited the mayors office. The next week, the building wiring was approved WITHOUT any more visits to the site! The problem was in the high voltage wiring in some of the labs and the city had no one high voltage trained. My company offered to train them.
Which brings up a point, many city inspectors have difficulty spelling their name!
PlaneWood by Mike_in_KatyPlaneWood
Yeah, I hear ya. I grew up just minutes north of you in Visalia. It's just that I've gotten really tired of hearing about "freedom", especially from our leadership. (Yikes, this thread may never shut down). Far too often when the word freedom is thrown out, it's true meaning/intention is seflishness and self-interest. Society should be strengthened by individual freedoms, not weakened by them.
Scott
Mike, If I was to guess what started it all then it would be insurance companies. I personally think it is a good idea even if cheating is common place. I might liken it to the smoking laws here in CA. You folks can still smoke in bars while we have to go outside. Yes, those of us that smoke know that it is going to kill us someday. The insurance companies pushed through that initiative in CA because of lawsuits and insurance claims concerning second hand smoke.
Maybe, in Texas your homeowners insurance would pay for a barn that burnt down because it wasn't built to code with the proper permits. They wouldn't in CA.
Steve - in Northern California
Now, to me, that is downright unamerican!
Really? And you feel that way because, I guess, you're completely free and independent?
OK, what if there's a fire at your house. Do you expect the Fire Dep't to show up and help? Why should a taxpayer-supported service be expected to help you, if the taxpayers don't first get to check that that your structure meets basic safety requirements?
Same thing if the house experiences some structural failure, or some get electracuted. Or, the water heater blows up. If someone gets hurt, do you expect public facilities to show up and help?
And when you decide you want to retire and move into town, do you expect to sell your house to someone else? Someone who expects the house to be safe?
Finally, us rural property owners aren't exempt from property taxes. Inspections ensure that improvements get added to the tax roles.
BTW, inspectors refused entry can and may show up later with warrants and armed deputies!
I've read that some rural counties in CA have simplified codes for owner-built and -occupied dwelling, But they still must meet basic standards.
"OK, what if there's a fire at your house. Do you expect the Fire Dep't to show up and help? Why should a taxpayer-supported service be expected to help you, if the taxpayers don't first get to check that that your structure meets basic safety requirements?"
Barry, did you know that Fireman's Fund Insurance Co. provided indirect financial support to Fire Departments. They would put a plaque on the outside of your house that let the fire departments know your house was insured by Fireman's Fund and expected that the house would be protected or saved before others. This pratice is now against the law so the major insurance companies constantly lobby for means to protect their interests. Many good things have come out of this but I can assure you, the only interest was not in making your life safer.
Just a bit of trivia to ponder...
Have a nice weekend
Steve - in Northern California
There's some good points here on both sides. I'm a 3rd gen. Californian and have always lived here. I've been in AE and CX project management in general since '75 and in wireless since '88. Codes and permits are a big part of my job. Codes are a necessary safeguard. Without enforcement codes are useless. Consider the difference in loss of life and property when a 6.0 hits LA v.s. a 4.0 in Mexico City or Armenia.What I have a problem with is when permit and inspection fees get to be about revenue instead of safety.
There are always exceptions to every rule and rural areas in CA do get a break. Case in point, there was a shaker here a few years back centered in Flanders out in the desert. The only building standing near the epicenter was a house that belonged to a co-worker's parents. They built it themselves. It was litteraly at ground zero and the everybody from Cal-Tech to the ICBO was interested as to why it survived. The house was built 1 room at a time. Each room was a stick-framed box sheathed both sides with plywood. 100% shear panel through and through. The boxes were bolted together.John O'Connell - JKO Handcrafted Woodworking
Life is tough. It's tougher if you're stupid - John Wayne
I think you've hit on the number 1 reason why rules are so "hated"
That home while it was well built may have violated some part of the code, or some inspectors version of the code.
I'm building my home to be as bomb proof as possible. I carefully read every chapter of the UBC and since I've got so much experiance in construction feel that I pretty much understand why and what about the code. Yet I'm worried about final inspection. I know it won't be because I cut a corner, but I'm also doing things way differant than the norm.
Imagine someone without a lot of experiance trying to do this, The unknowns pretty much could drive you nuts and pretty soon you feel like the comments are about you, not the methods of construction and then you take it personally. You work hard and then a stranger comments about your work............
John, a true native... I'm 6th generation and the family now extends to 8 generations, most of which, still live in the same town. Families in Ca that are 3 or more generations old usually have an entirely different way of life than the average Californian. Sure wish people would understand that.Steve - in Northern California
Codes are the MINIMUM accepted requirements. You can always exceed the limits code. The codes are required for a reason. It is safety. The states then tweek to their peculiar enviroment such as in Calif. Ours has to do with earthquakes, florida hurricane ect. They were established to provide and assure the minimum safe buildiig techniques and materials are used and that contractors must meet them. Permits ... Well thats another issue. Its another word for ...taxes. Darkworksite4: When the job is to small for everyone else, Its just about right for me"
GCLANCY,
ADA is not a code, it's an Act of Congress and carries with it the force of law. As such it's equipped with a set of teeth that Codes could only dream of - violations are proscecuted as a violation of Civil Rights. The door is wide open for Class Action lawsuits that can bring municipalities and states to there knees. I wonder if ADA has been ammended since my copy ('91) includes Title I which applies to public agencies and Title II which applies to public places privately owned?
Steve,
Your family either breeds like rabbits or was at Sutter's Mill :) Unfortunatley :( those of us down south in the land o' gridlock don't experience much of the lifestyle of which you speak and of which I dearly miss. I work with people that have a 3-4 hour commute just so they can own a house they can afford out in the smog belt. My daily round trip of 50 miles takes 1:20 to 1:30 and that's considered a cake walk.
I lived my first 10 years with my grandparents in Hope Ranch, Santa Barbara, so I recognize the 'feel'. I don't think it kicks-in until the central coast begins. It's in the blood though, because I can just begin to 'feel it' when I get past Ventura and it grows stronger and pulls me like a tractor beam until I'm eating fish taco's and sucking down a Negra Modello in Santa Cruz. I can't wait until the kids are educated so I can 'Head North Old Man'.John O'Connell - JKO Handcrafted Woodworking
Life is tough. It's tougher if you're stupid - John Wayne
El-coholic,
I know that ADA is not a code, thank you very much. I was stating, perhaps poorly, that at least one community had initiated mandating the access/building requirements for disabled Americans on new single family Residential construction. I think it would be the first such instance in the U.S., I did a Yahoo search for the article(s) but was un-successful.
And, to All, while on this subject, what about all those tract houses down in Florida that had their roofs blown off, because of no rafter ties. They were permitted and "inspected" at the time they were built.
Greg
Locks are for honest people. There was an affordable housing project here back in the 50's that was permited and inspected.
Just a few years ago it was revealed that only the last home built had re-bar in the foundation. Seems they were all identical so the contractor would get the inspection then pull the re-bar, pour and move the re-bar to the next house and repeat the process. Steve - in Northern California
Wow! With all these comments. I think i shall ponder them while I go pee in the river.
Wasn't it the Europeans that introduced the idea of personal rights and property ownership to North America?
PlaneWood by Mike_in_KatyPlaneWood
AN interesting discussion. An observation - codes are not limited to only safety issues any longer. At least one municipaity out west has adopted Americans with disabilites requirements for new residential construction. That's lifestyle, not safety.
Greg
I will have you know, Barry, that some of my relatives in rural OR are "completely free and independent." They're off the power grid, producing their own electricity with solar, natural gas, and piezoelectric equipment. The construction of their homes is not inspected, though it meets code regulations. If their house catches fire, it burns(none ever have). Just because a home is self built does not by any stretch mean that the construction is "slipshod", as an earlier writer suggests. The problem that I have with elitist, regulatory fascism is that it assumes people are too irresponsible and stupid to manage their own lives, i.e. buliding their own homes, for themselves. This country was founded upon the exact opposite assumption, that is, that people are capable of self-governance. I for one still believe this to be true.
When will we ever get off this idea of "It's my property and I'll do what I want"?
Everybody lives downstream from somebody so quit peeing in the river when I'm taking a drink.
If everybody just built for themselves then building codes wouldn't be needed. Just hand your home off to your heirs and let Darwinism run it's course. But when people build for others then they must be held to a safety standard. Enough said.
Hi PlaneWood,
I understand your concern but I side with the inspectors. I live in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada and I enjoy doing renovations for a past time. I find that a large percent of do it yourself jobs contain very bad mistakes.
I have found electric wiring just taped together and the ground wire not connected. In this case it seems the additude is, I put it together - plugged it in - it worked - therefor it is good - no consideration of - is it safe?
I have found major framing members cut into. A house where a 2x4 was used in place of a major post under a structural beam. A strutural 2x6 wall replace by an undersized beam. Well the house is 40 years old and has not fallen down yet so what is all the fuss about? This is plain, simple, unsafe.
I have found entrance doors that were made wider on a load bearing wall by removing the framing studs. Again, no thought in what was going to hold the roof up.
Inspections can be a pain but they have been put into place to help you rather than to hinder you. If you do a good job, the inspector should be in and out quickly.
Peter
I agree completely with the code compliance. Right now, I am at a job-site in Vinita, Oklahoma. This is the worst place I have been during my 15+ years of international travel. It could be argued that code compliance could have saved this town. I see ONE house that I would actually live in. The rest of the homes are broken, literally! I see large homes and small homes, and they are all broken down and swaying in the wind.
At home in Missouri, we have strict codes and compliance is heavily enforced. What this does for me is: 1) I build a house and I can live in it for years to come without damage from the environment as long as it is reasonably maintained. 2) Code compliance ensures that my investment, probably the largest investment of my life, is not going to decline in value due to my neighbors erecting a shanty next door.
This applies even in a rural situation. Lets say you owned 100 acres and built a beautiful mansion right in the middle. Yet, for miles and miles around, bordering your property are some new homes that pop up. Those homes look great at first. After 5, maybe 10 years, they are falling apart because the contractor cut corners and did not follow code. Now it's official, you may still have a beautiful home, but you live in the middle of a wasteland and the value of your home has decreased. No one wants to buy a home that is nested in the middle of rubble (which is what this entire town is made of!!!)
Lets face it, we all want to live in a nice neighborhood where the value of our home is protected.
-Del
This forum post is now archived. Commenting has been disabled