Posts: 2,389
Threads: 126
Joined: Jun 2009
Such a case already exists and I had a copy of it many years ago.
If I'm recalling this correctly; the homesteaders act was cited within the case and became the linch pin in the litigation. I wish I could recall all the details but I do know that many states allow all portions of construction to be preformed by homeowners because of this case.
So if one can pull that up... they already have the case wrapped up, they just need to take it to court and cite the case and the legislation will face the noose.
E ho'a'o no i pau kuhihewa.
Posts: 1,955
Threads: 100
Joined: Aug 2005
The system in Hawaii county/state is way broke But there needs to be some kind of building / life safety code and inspections because people don’t know what they don’t know and can do really stupid things - i.e. wiring a house with stereo wire and I could list a thousand others that I’ve seen personally.
The international residential code ( one of the IBCs ) is set up like a cookbook so if your building a average house you don’t need an architect or engineer it’s just if your building a house so big you need foundation (A) floor joist( B) studs ( C ) rafter ( D ) pipe this size and wire that size and then you inspect everyone the same. Because I have seen work of licensed contractors that is no where close to any code.
Posts: 1,727
Threads: 29
Joined: Feb 2006
Somehow I don't see as how this is going to make things simple. Any time lawyers and attorneys get involved with the County/State & Feds, have you ever seen it get better?
"I like yard sales," he said. "All true survivalists like yard sales."
Kurt Wilson
"I like yard sales," he said. "All true survivalists like yard sales."
Kurt Wilson
Posts: 2,389
Threads: 126
Joined: Jun 2009
One of the other things I find disturbing in the Hawaii code is this determination that an owner builder is immediately cited as a "general contractor". That itself is also damning to the code. Home owners who build their own home cannot be considered a general contractor just because the code deems it so. That is another breach by removing ones right to autonomy and placing them subject to the laws found in business just because they want to build their own home. These codes are rotten to the core.
E ho'a'o no i pau kuhihewa.
Posts: 1,273
Threads: 41
Joined: Oct 2007
If you are concerned about buying a house, rather than a state inspector, hire someone who knows what the hell they are doing to look it over. It's a very short course to get that ticket. This mentality is very common in Europe, as there's a lot of houses that are 400 years old, which wouldn't comply to anything at all, and what is important is that there "isn't a problem." Here, in the land of the free and the brave it's all about whether you've payed the appropriate people off or not. If you septic system works or not is infinitely less important to the fact if whether you've got your magic stamp of approval or not. Result? Well payed designers and turds in the bay.
Hotcatz: I'll take a lawsuit to define undefinable law any time over adding more undefinable law on top of undefinable law. What we have is a situation where everything is illegal and some get to pick and choose what is and what is not enforced. That's the worst of all, and it doesn't stop with building. Another constitutional issue, and a big one.
Posts: 1,955
Threads: 100
Joined: Aug 2005
The constitutionality of zoning has been challenged in court several times and zoning has won every time. You have to find a specific fubar in the law ( I think the word is malfeasance? )
Posts: 968
Threads: 74
Joined: Aug 2007
I believe in the building codes. In fact, considering the seismic risks involved, I think in many ways (foundations, required amount of shear protection, etc.) the codes here are too lenient. And, I think having something in place to insure that people have safe and functional homes is a good idea. On the other hand, and considering mans right to play the fool, I think people should be allowed to do what they please, for themselves. But, when doing so it should be understood that if you built a structure on your property as an owner builder, in order to SELL your property whatever you built must pass the equivalent of a final inspection. With the entire inspection process always available as you build, which would get it over with upfront. But either way I believe there should be standards and home BUYERS should have a right to expect that all the homes on the market meet them.
Posts: 1,273
Threads: 41
Joined: Oct 2007
False security. Lava zone one? Do you want to permit a titanium house with the same tile they build the shuttle out of? Don't think that's extreme. I engineer a lot of crazy crap, it's wholly doable to design a house that will withstand a lava flow. It will cost, well, 200 million dollars, off the cuff.
100 mph real sustained wind will blow anything down.
a 8 or better earthquake will crush or at least leave all akimbo any house, even if it survives. Hard to level a lot.
Lava, of course.
There is a wave, designed by nature, that will sink any boat. If it's got your number, it's surprisingly small, as tank test bear out. The magic number for boats is if the wave height is 1.2 times the beam of the boat, you could indeed sink. That's pretty tiny seas, really, and the rest is just dumb luck.
What to do, what to do. Perhaps stop and think what the objectives are.
Posts: 174
Threads: 4
Joined: Jan 2006
Okay, I'll jump into this. I used to be a Special Inspector which I was licensed to only inspect Concrete, Masonry and PT Concrete. With that said, the building code is written by an international organization of building officials which includes architects and engineers. It plainly states in the code that the purpose of the code is to protect the general public from harm. If the state/county adopts the code they must also adopt the responsibility of enforcing the code. They can also amend the code to a higher level but not the other way around. So they are bound to enforce it at a minimum. The County did not allow people to build without permits. People built without the County knowledge.
So what should the county do now? Kick people out of their homes and tear them down to enforce the rules? Or do what they are doing now and allow people to stay in their homes but not allow attachments to unpermitted bulidings. In the meantime they report the home to the tax agency. The county is in violation of the law as they adopted it by not tearing down unpermitted structures (at the owners expense BTW). As I see it, it is a damned if you do and damned if you don't situation if they don't strictly enforce the code. Remember the County does not write the basic code they only adopt it. And 90% of the world adopts the same code that Hawaii does. The code that the County and States adopt states that a registered architect or engineer must sign off on the design. I am not sure about the Owner/Builder being a General Contractor though.
I think that a part of what is being discussed is an adopted practice written by engineers and architects and another part is certain adoptions by the state and/or county of Hawaii. It may be prudent to determine a certain regulation or law which is part of the building code and which part is passed by a bureaucrat in the government. JMHO
The Kona Forum
http://www.konaforum.com
Da Kine PC Repair Upgrade
http://www.DaKinePC.com
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former". --Albert Einstein
Posts: 2,389
Threads: 126
Joined: Jun 2009
The whole system is flawed in more way than one all across the board.
When it comes to SF residential there should be no fixed codes but rather rating types for the home, be it non-conforming, specialty and its subcategories, generic and highest standards applied with an open adoption of anything new or further that can be recognized. When it comes to all buildings that are to be occupied by the public (inclusive of apartments)... then one can place the government into the equation and create all the hoopla. Otherwise a person should be allowed to buy and or build what ever they like, crap or not crap, straw, caged rocks, mud, brick, or anything else one can compile and use.
No-one should assume an insurance companies or banks needs must be met when a person may choose not to insure a house they bought with cash. Freedoms should be observed when it comes to the private citizen and his or her domicile. As it stands, one can pitch a tent on their own property and live in that if they like, even though some would like to misconstrue the code pertaining to tents in the Hawaii code which only apply to special events and commercial/organized religion applications only. So... if one has the right to live in a tent of their own choice they certainly have the right to live in what ever they like, regardless of its fabrication method.
E ho'a'o no i pau kuhihewa.
|
