04-28-2015, 04:04 AM
Lquade,
Thanks for the nod of appreciation. Yes, I also agree with you and Kalakoa that a minimum standard is acceptable and that's precisely how the whole idea of the building department began. It was from that premise that it was accepted by many communities long ago. This is something we can all agree on, that a minimum safety standard should be met by the private builder not engaging in the business of construction. The whole idea of building codes came about the coming together of Architects, Engineers and professional home builders in an effort to better the art of construction. These organizations were engaged in the professional aspect. In the beginning, it was the builders who adopted the codes published from these organizations making them a member of that professional organization. Later it evolved into municipalities adopting the codes and this is where the concept crossed the line and why for many years there was such a wide diversity of codes from one state to the next and even from county to county and city to city in some cases across the nation. Eventually all of these code organization were joined together under the International brand of codes.
These standards are fine and dandy for application in the profession of building but they cross the line when applied to the non Profession aspect of building for oneself. This would be liken to applying the established standards of professions to people practicing these arts for themselves at home and as we all know that would be completely inappropriate.
Since these codes are applied to even the common person building a home for themselves, the propensity to ignore the permitting process is increased and especially so in more rural settings. It's the lack of honoring the most basic of safety standards applicable to the self home builder that have in-fact lead to a less safe situation. I'm a firm believer in setting the two aspects of building apart from one another with regard to code standard divisions between self built verses professionally built.
Now if what I had expressed earlier with the land rights being transferred with the land and subject to change under subdivision were observed the opportunity to better meet or facilitate safety would be available to municipalities. Under such a standard practice a new subdivision could be approved where the latest of building codes could become applicable no matter if built by private home owner or a construction company. This insures more condensed subdivisions are protected by the latest advancements in the art. Such a system also subjects the contractors to the latest codes no matter where they build yet still affords the self builder the right to build to a minimum standard of safety within the older and typically larger parceled subdivisions. So we end up with land rights transferred with the land and the applicable standards of the code applied respectively to the subject parcel in question and in some cases where the subdivision was granted with the most recent of building codes applied not even a private home builder is then allowed to build to the minimal safety standards as that land right does not exist with that most modern planning applied to that granted subdivision.
This would substantially reduce the burdens placed on the big islands building department and promote a reasonable building standard amongst self builders and as Kalakoa has pointed out by adding an improvements tax reduction for following by the minimum safety standard then people would be even more inclined to follow by the applicable code. Another aspect is not recording the house plan as public record. That is technically private information that should not be made public and another aspect of another problem regarding privacies violations.
Thanks for the nod of appreciation. Yes, I also agree with you and Kalakoa that a minimum standard is acceptable and that's precisely how the whole idea of the building department began. It was from that premise that it was accepted by many communities long ago. This is something we can all agree on, that a minimum safety standard should be met by the private builder not engaging in the business of construction. The whole idea of building codes came about the coming together of Architects, Engineers and professional home builders in an effort to better the art of construction. These organizations were engaged in the professional aspect. In the beginning, it was the builders who adopted the codes published from these organizations making them a member of that professional organization. Later it evolved into municipalities adopting the codes and this is where the concept crossed the line and why for many years there was such a wide diversity of codes from one state to the next and even from county to county and city to city in some cases across the nation. Eventually all of these code organization were joined together under the International brand of codes.
These standards are fine and dandy for application in the profession of building but they cross the line when applied to the non Profession aspect of building for oneself. This would be liken to applying the established standards of professions to people practicing these arts for themselves at home and as we all know that would be completely inappropriate.
Since these codes are applied to even the common person building a home for themselves, the propensity to ignore the permitting process is increased and especially so in more rural settings. It's the lack of honoring the most basic of safety standards applicable to the self home builder that have in-fact lead to a less safe situation. I'm a firm believer in setting the two aspects of building apart from one another with regard to code standard divisions between self built verses professionally built.
Now if what I had expressed earlier with the land rights being transferred with the land and subject to change under subdivision were observed the opportunity to better meet or facilitate safety would be available to municipalities. Under such a standard practice a new subdivision could be approved where the latest of building codes could become applicable no matter if built by private home owner or a construction company. This insures more condensed subdivisions are protected by the latest advancements in the art. Such a system also subjects the contractors to the latest codes no matter where they build yet still affords the self builder the right to build to a minimum standard of safety within the older and typically larger parceled subdivisions. So we end up with land rights transferred with the land and the applicable standards of the code applied respectively to the subject parcel in question and in some cases where the subdivision was granted with the most recent of building codes applied not even a private home builder is then allowed to build to the minimal safety standards as that land right does not exist with that most modern planning applied to that granted subdivision.
This would substantially reduce the burdens placed on the big islands building department and promote a reasonable building standard amongst self builders and as Kalakoa has pointed out by adding an improvements tax reduction for following by the minimum safety standard then people would be even more inclined to follow by the applicable code. Another aspect is not recording the house plan as public record. That is technically private information that should not be made public and another aspect of another problem regarding privacies violations.