What would you say about these water pipes?

[Ken Rowe]

New water pipes to the old clawfoot tub. Plumbing permit pulled but not closed out yet.

[Scott Patterson]

Awkward!

[Billy Stephens]

Inadequate Clearance.
* attachment courtesy of WC Jerry.
.

[Ken Rowe]

Inadequate Clearance.
* attachment courtesy of WC Jerry.
.

There is adequate clearance between the stool and tub. The diagrams don't really have anything to do with pipes, just fixtures and walls.

I actually suggested routing them along the floor, then vertical to the tub to prevent accidental breakage.

[Scott Patterson]

There is adequate clearance between the stool and tub. The diagrams don't really have anything to do with pipes, just fixtures and walls.

I actually suggested routing them along the floor, then vertical to the tub to prevent accidental breakage.

Actually the pipes are encroaching on the fixtures so they do count! You still need a proper clearance around the toilet and the tub. This might be the reason that their is not a final inspection from the AHJ.

[Billy Stephens]

There is adequate clearance between the stool and tub[/SIZE]. The diagrams don't really have anything to do with pipes

, just fixtures and walls.
.
.
So The Supply Lines Attached To The Tub ( that is within the minimum clearance )
don't have anything to do with the diagram ?

If the Minimum Clearance was obstructed say with a Cast Iron Vent, Roof Support, Column of Glass Blocks or any other Permanent obstruction other than fixtures or walls then they do not count? :confused:
.

[Ken Rowe]

.
So The Supply Lines Attached To The Tub ( that is within the minimum clearance )
don't have anything to do with the diagram ?

If the Minimum Clearance was obstructed say with a Cast Iron Vent, Roof Support, Column of Glass Blocks or any other Permanent obstruction other than fixtures or walls then they do not count? :confused:
.

All I'm saying is the diagram which you posted does not address items other than fixtures and walls. The posted diagram does not address water pipes. Not even the one for a toilet which would normally stick out from the wall or floor. If this diagram was meant to address water pipes the supply line for the toilet should be in this diagram.

[Ken Rowe]

Actually the pipes are encroaching on the fixtures so they do count! You still need a proper clearance around the toilet and the tub. This might be the reason that their is not a final inspection from the AHJ.

I agree they are encroaching and are not adequately supported. I'm guessing it will also be flagged when the plumbing inspection is finalized. The permit was only pulled last week and the house is in the process of being rehabed.

[Billy Stephens]

All I'm saying is the diagram which you posted does not address items other than fixtures and walls.

The posted diagram does not address water pipes. Not even the one for a toilet which would normally stick out from the wall or floor.

If this diagram was meant to address water pipes the supply line for the toilet should be in this diagram.
.
:rolleyes: I"ll Get West Coast Jerry on It ASAP . :rolleyes:
* the intent of the diagram is to be used as a Quick Reference to Permanent Obstructions for Proper Clearance to the Front and Side of the Toilet.

Do You Also Install Toilet Supply Lines In Front of The Bowl ? :D
.

[Ken Rowe]

.
:rolleyes: I"ll Get West Coast Jerry on It ASAP . :rolleyes:
* the intent of the diagram is to be used as a Quick Reference to Permanent Obstructions for Proper Clearance to the Front and Side of the Toilet.

Do You Also Install Toilet Supply Lines In Front of The Bowl ? :D
.


I guess I don't get your analogy. The supply lines for the tub aren't on the wrong side of the tub.

[Billy Stephens]

I guess I don't get your analogy.

The supply lines for the tub aren't on the wrong side of the tub.
.
Ken,

But They Do Encroach ( Permanently ) into the Required Clearance of The Toilet Bowl.
.
If it were say a Door that opened ( not Permanently ) into the Required Clearance of 15 inches Center line of the Toilet it would be dumb but could be moved out of the Required Clearance of 15 inches Center Line and be Allowed. ;)
.
.

[Ken Rowe]

.
Ken,

But They Do Encroach ( Permanently ) into the Required Clearance of The Toilet Bowl.
.
If it were say a Door that opened ( not Permanently ) into the Required Clearance of 15 inches Center line of the Toilet it would be dumb but could be moved out of the Required Clearance of 15 inches Center Line and be Allowed. ;)
.
.

I agree that they do encroach. I've already stated that. But I was looking for specific information which the diagram you posted did not address.

[Billy Stephens]

.

. But I was looking for specific information which the diagram you posted did not address.
.
Feel Free to Add To The Diagram with the Specifics of Your Choice. :rolleyes:
* please Post It so others May Learn.
.
.

[Ted Menelly]

Its just wrong. The pipes are not protected and kids are not protected from them
You just cannot have water lines exposed in such a location. Throw the rule books away and stop looking for your answer ther. It is not logically correct in any way. I can see a kid stepping on them to climb into the tub etc etc etc.

[Phil Brody]

Maybe they can paint them green and that would fix everything, aside, routing them on the floor would be the best suggestion since citing a source specifically for the pipes would be tough to find.

[Phil Brody]

Maybe they can paint them green and that would fix everything, aside, routing them on the floor would be the best suggestion since citing a source specifically for the pipes would be tough to find.

[Ken Lyons]

Refer to plumber to correct plumbing/piping defect.


My fix would be to build a short wall to hide them in, maybe put the toilet on an elevated floor, they SHOULD re-route the pipes in the basement if posible. That piping is just flat wrong and there is no easy way to correct it without moving the pipes.

Just like putting a support column in the dead center of a living room... just in the way and shouldn't be there.

[Buist Langley]

Aesthetics aside, there are clearance issues for the pipe and fixtures and walls. There is possible burn hazards with close proximity to the un-insulated hot water pipe. I also agree with the possible pipe damage.

[Ken Rowe]

Refer to plumber to correct plumbing/piping defect.


My fix would be to build a short wall to hide them in, maybe put the toilet on an elevated floor, they SHOULD re-route the pipes in the basement if posible. That piping is just flat wrong and there is no easy way to correct it without moving the pipes.

Just like putting a support column in the dead center of a living room... just in the way and shouldn't be there.


This was done by a licensed plumber, with a permit. (permit not finalized). :(

[Ken Lyons]

This was done by a licensed plumber, with a permit. (permit not finalized). :(

I doubt the inspector will approve of that safety hazard. The inspector can force him to correct the issue, by not signing off the permit. If the permit is not closed the homeowner has recourse to without payment for incomplete work.

A permit is not a license to do faulty work, the purpose of the permit is to allow the city inspector to catch these idiots before they leave the job site and demand they do it right.

If that piping is in a slab, he is going to have to suck it up and use a jack hammer to redo the piping, properly. Getting a permit does not automaticly guarentee that it's to code. Everyone here has seen crappy work, done with a permit... usually it's the inspector who didn't care or catch it.


A homeowner doing work without a permit is liable to themselves if it's not to code, they put themselves in danger. A contractor without a permit, places the homeowner in danger without the homeowner knowing the danger. A permit lets the city know to check this issue to ensure the homeowner is not placed in danger by faulty work.......and to raise taxes.

[Wayne Carlisle]

There is not anything in the IRC that this type of installation violates. We all know that the IRC doesn't allow for common sense though!

It does violate the ADA though as far as protection of the pipes for those that are sensitive to hot or cold. Only thing is...this is not a commercial use!

[Randy Aldering]

Functional. Poor workmanship. That is about all that can be said. As for the code inspection, chances are good that this will be approved. It will depend on the jurisdiction, and how picky the inspectors are, and whether or not they have been allowed to be picky. In my service area, code inspectors would approve this. It is "right"? That's very arguable. Perhaps, if the safety concerns were explained to the plumber, along with the potential for litigation, he may be inclined to take the time to move the supply pipes, despite the tile work that will have to be done.

[Robert Dalga]

Moreover, those pipes appear to be 1/2" (???), if so, 3/4" would be preferrable.

[Mitchell Toelle]

I agree they are encroaching and are not adequately supported. I'm guessing it will also be flagged when the plumbing inspection is finalized. The permit was only pulled last week and the house is in the process of being rehabed.

The workmans nylon arm chair really says it all. Despite what the AHJ may or may not do you need to mention to your client the poor workmanship, clea rances, hazards (hot water piping, entanglement, etc.) and then let the chips fall where they may.

[Jerry Peck]

All I'm saying is the diagram which you posted does not address items other than fixtures and walls. The posted diagram does not address water pipes.

Actually, that drawing DOES address those pipes, and ANYTHING ELSE.

This is because the space shown in those drawings is CLEAR FLOOR SPACE, meaning NOTHING is allowed to intrude into that space, not even pipes.

[Ken Rowe]

Actually, that drawing DOES address those pipes, and ANYTHING ELSE.

This is because the space shown in those drawings is CLEAR FLOOR SPACE, meaning NOTHING is allowed to intrude into that space, not even pipes.

I have to disagree. The diagram shows only walls and fixtures, not pipes whatsoever. It has no statement regarding "clear floor space" and has no reference as to where the diagram originated. As a litigation consultant you know it's never safe to assume anything. We all agree it was a screwed up mess, but I was looking for something that would show the installation was irrefutably incorrect. This diagram just doesn't show that.

[Jerry Peck]

I have to disagree. The diagram shows only walls and fixtures, not pipes whatsoever. It has no statement regarding "clear floor space" and has no reference as to where the diagram originated.

Ken,

Did you read the bottom?

Where it says "Minimum Fixture CLEARances"?

That is what it is showing, CLEARances to the nearest obstruction, which is anticipated to be a wall or a partition, but is not limited to be a wall or a partition.


As a litigation consultant you know it's never safe to assume anything.

Which is why you should have done two things:
1) Read what that figure is about - it is written at the bottom right under "Figure R307.2".
2) Understand the code requirements that figure is derived from in the code and what it is depicting.


We all agree it was a screwed up mess, but I was looking for something that would show the installation was irrefutably incorrect. This diagram just doesn't show that.

That diagram DOES show that, as long as you did, and you understood, 1) and 2) above.

[Cobra Cook]

I love the neatness of his bending of the curves. Maybe on a concrete slab by the way the vent comes up and then goes into the wall, also the fact that the toilet supply comes up at the side of the toilet instead of the normal left side of the rear. If it is over a crawl space or basement the plumber was just lazy.
According to the drawing like it or not, the side measurement of the wall to the center of the toilet is what will be enforced and sadly it looks ok, if it is not 15 inches to the wall side of the flush handle, it is not.
If the home was being renovated for a handicapped resident, it would not pass inspection because they have different clearance requirements for "both" sides of the toilet in a residential home. No matter what the inspector says if the owner does not like it and can not see future problems, they have the right to say that it is not acceptable or not and want it done in a more acceptable and professional manner.
Most slaw foot tubs have exposed pipes but not to this extreme, if looks like the tub was already there and the owner wanted a toilet installed later.

[Steve Zabarylo]

Well, at least the original tap set was replaced with one that doesn't have the potential to cross-connect, unless of course the shower head is on a flexible hose and reaches into the tub.

The hot run may be a burn hazard if that mixing valve is not set low enough.

I would reccommend rerunning the connection so that it could be boxed in to the extent possible (low and back to the wall).

Esthetics, except as the extent it may effect future of the propery, is irrelevant. Is this a single item that stands out as odd in the house? I doubt it.

[Ken Rowe]

Ken,

Did you read the bottom?

Where it says "Minimum Fixture CLEARances"?

That is what it is showing, CLEARances to the nearest obstruction, which is anticipated to be a wall or a partition, but is not limited to be a wall or a partition.



Which is why you should have done two things:
1) Read what that figure is about - it is written at the bottom right under "Figure R307.2".
2) Understand the code requirements that figure is derived from in the code and what it is depicting.



That diagram DOES show that, as long as you did, and you understood, 1) and 2) above.

I still disagree. Minimum Fixture Clearances means clearance between fixtures. Pipes are not fixtures.

The UPC defines Plumbing Fixtures as " A receptacle or device that is either permanently or temporarily connected to the water distribution system of the premises and demands a supply of water therefrom; discharges wastewater, liquid-borne waste materials or sewage either directly or indirectly to the drainage system of the premises; or requires both a water supply connection and a discharge to the drainage system of the premises." PIPES ARE NOT FIXTURES

"Figure R307.2" does not indicate whatsoever where the document originated. No where on this diagram does it state that it's from any plumbing code. We might assume by the figure number but the document itself does not show that it is.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

KR, If you cannot read a diagram and its notes or title, or read a code section I doubt you'd be able to read and comprehend a post explaining here. You have been provided the answer to your question (a 30" wide free zone for nothing but the WC and accessibility) from the centerline of the WC left to right and 24" (not 21", per Minnesota Plumbing Code, citation below) forward from the front lip of the bowl. This is consistant with Minnesota Ammendments. The door and wall to the left of the bowl IS of issue down the road if the designed permanent location, and swing.

Next, don't know why you have your shorts in a bundle in the first place. You later added this plumbing permit was a WEEK old and work was in progress on a remodel project. Its obviously a temporary hook-up.

It is NOT uncommon for a plumbing contractor to provide temporary hook-ups to keep a bath (and toilet and sink for that matter) temporarily functional for the period work is in progress. It is in fact better practice to keep the plumbing system "clean" rather than have unpiped and exposed valve outlets.

It is more common to WAIT until the ordered exposed finished claw foot tub exposed supply and drain lines (and often a shower riser) come IN (special order often) to the supply house, before re-routing the supply (assuring fit and location clearances).

Why are you even involved at this point? Have you even reviewed the PLAN?

If you have concerns I suggest you find out when the next stage of inspection will take place and be there then, in the meantime look at the PLAN and the permit application and have a stab at finding out just what the codes are in the jurisdiction and what MATERIAL specifications are that are permitted to supply the TUB.

See: Minnesota Plumbing Code Link: http://www.dli.mn.gov/ccld/PDF/pe_code09.pdf

-4715.1220 INSTALLATION OF FIXTURES.
--Subpart 1. Fixtures. Fixtures must be set level and in proper alignment with reference to adjacent walls. No water closet may be set closer than 15 inches from its center to any side wall or partition nor closer than 30 inches, center to center, between toilets. At least a 24-inch clearance must be provided in front of water closets. Note: The centerline of water closets used primarily by children 12 and younger must be a minimum of 12 inches to a maximum of 18 inches from the side wall or partition.

--(skipped paragraph regarding urinals)

--Plumbing fixtures must be so installed as to afford easy access for cleaning both the fixture and the area around it. Where practical, all pipes from fixtures must be run to the nearest wall.

4715.1440 PROTECTION OF PLASTIC PIPE. (yes I know, bad title but read it, includes copper pipe and copper tube)

All plastic and copper pipe and tubing passing through studs or plates that are within one and one-fourth inches of the outside of the stud or plate must be protected by the provision of 1/16 inch or 0.060 mild steel plates attached to the outside of the stud or plate, or equivalent protection.

See also: 4715.1240 BATHTUBS and 4715.1420 WATER CLOSETS

and if a shower is planed, see:

-4715.1380 SHOWERS.
--Subpart 1. Water supply riser. Every water supply riser from the shower valve to the shower head outlet, whether exposed or not, shall be securely attached to the structure.

And since you made a point of throwing around definitions, let us use the correct one for your application. You'll find it in subpart 80 of Part 4715.0100 of the Minnesota Plumbing Code (Minnesota Administrative Rules):

-4715.0100 DEFINITIONS.
--Subp. 46. Fixture. See "plumbing fixture."
--Subp. 80 Plumbing fixture. "Plumbing fixture" means a receptacle or device which is either permanently or temporarily connected to the water distribution system, and demands a supply of water therefrom, or it discharges used water, liquid-borne waste materials, or sewage either directly or indirectly to the drainage system, or which requires both a water supply connection and a discharge to the drainage system. Plumbing appliances as a special class of fixture are further defined.

Edited to include citations and Minnesota Plumbing Code quotations.

[Cobra Cook]

Robert, you not run 3/4 pipe to a sink,tub or toilet. The main line in a house is a minimum 3/4 but to the branches 1/2 is the norm.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Robert, you not run 3/4 pipe to a sink,tub or toilet. The main line in a house is a minimum 3/4 but to the branches 1/2 is the norm.

Not necessarily true. You run what ever is required to support the supply fixture unit demand on the branch (and this varies by code if private or public for the specific plumbing fixtures).

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

H.G. You seem to assume too much. The house was vacant. Is it common practice for a plumber to solder in temporary water piping to the bathtub of a vacant house? Let me answer that for you. No, it isn't. The house was being rehabbed and I was hired by the buyer to do a buyer's inspection. There were no plans presented to me and I have no right to ask for them, so why do ask if I even reviewed them? You should read the entire thread before jumping in with your opinions. If you had actually read this thread you would already know what I told the buyers. You would also know that the disagreement I'm having with JP has nothing to do with these pipes, but the diagram that was originally submitted. Add in the fact that JP seems to believe water pipes are considered fixtures and you might have a clue.

Thank you for producing the Minnesota PC fixture definition. It shows you can read my profile to see where I live. Doesn't do much good in this case though since the house is in Wisconsin. You should ask questions before you assume too much. By the way, Minnesota doesn't define water pipes as fixtures either. Now use up another hour of your spare time and look up the Wisconsin PC for me.

Yes it is. Copper brazing a few pieces is minutes, done all the time. Won't stub out leaving dead ends with water use elsewhere! Unless the plumber wants to risk losing the C of O on the structure, or contaminating the plumbing system, it is VERY COMMON. Are you really so ignorant to not know that tradesmen use the bathtub all the time during rehab? Clearing drains of soliified muck from shop vac debris, drywall and plaster mud, etc. is big bucks post remodel/rehab for plumbers :p .

So now you're working in Wisconsin. Well, thanks for sharing. You can look up the codes yourself, won't do you much good since you don't know what they mean, heck you can't even read a diagram!

And oh yeah, running plumbing system on the floor surface, that's going to pass, Ha!

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

I still disagree. Minimum Fixture Clearances means clearance between fixtures. Pipes are not fixtures.

The UPC defines Plumbing Fixtures as " A receptacle or device that is either permanently or temporarily connected to the water distribution system of the premises and demands a supply of water therefrom; discharges wastewater, liquid-borne waste materials or sewage either directly or indirectly to the drainage system of the premises; or requires both a water supply connection and a discharge to the drainage system of the premises." PIPES ARE NOT FIXTURES

"Figure R307.2" does not indicate whatsoever where the document originated. No where on this diagram does it state that it's from any plumbing code. We might assume by the figure number but the document itself does not show that it is.
You still do not get it. Minimum Fixture Clearances are the Minimum CLEAR area for EACH FIXTURE. The code FLOOR view or footprint diagram and language further define/diagram clearances between various fixture arrangements/groupings and walls/partitions/and other temporary and permanent obstructions. PIPES INVADING THE FOOTPRINT ARE NOT CLEAR they are encumbrances/encroachments INTO THE REQUIRED CLEAR FLOOR AREA.

Slap yourself on the head. The toilet supply is also not allowed to ENCROACH - that is why you will often find it BEHIND THE rear wall/rim of the BOWL/STOOL and in the case of a tank WC - under the tank.

You cannot have anything touching the stool/bowl of a WC foreign to the WC. There must be clearance to not only use/address the WC but also to CLEAN IT.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

H.G. You seem to assume too much. The house was vacant. Is it common practice for a plumber to solder in temporary water piping to the bathtub of a vacant house? Let me answer that for you. No, it isn't. The house was being rehabbed and I was hired by the buyer to do a buyer's inspection. There were no plans presented to me and I have no right to ask for them, so why do ask if I even reviewed them? You should read the entire thread before jumping in with your opinions. If you had actually read this thread you would already know what I told the buyers. You would also know that the disagreement I'm having with JP has nothing to do with these pipes, but the diagram that was originally submitted. Add in the fact that JP seems to believe water pipes are considered fixtures and you might have a clue.

Thank you for producing the Minnesota PC fixture definition. It shows you can read my profile to see where I live. Doesn't do much good in this case though since the house is in Wisconsin. You should ask questions before you assume too much. By the way, Minnesota doesn't define water pipes as fixtures either. Now use up another hour of your spare time and look up the Wisconsin PC for me.

Why would I do that? expecially since WI requires "home inspectors" to be licensed, and the only Licensed Home Inspector in Wisconsin with a last name of Rowe has a first name of Robert, and a middle initial D, and in my book that doesn't = Ken Rowe, "Home Inspector", legal to inspect a home in Wisconsin, and why should I repeat a question, you don't answer them, (asked a question in first post on this topic).

Wisconsin DRL - Credential Lookup (http://online.drl.wi.gov/LicenseLookup/LicenseLookup.aspx)

A home inspector is an individual who, for compensation, examines the observable systems and components of improvements to residential real property that are readily accessible.
No individual may act as a home inspector, use the title "home inspector", use any title or description that implies that he or she is a home inspector or represent himself or herself to be a home inspector unless the individual is registered under Chapter 440, Subchapter X, Wis. Stats. (http://www.legis.state.wi.us/statutes/Stat0440.pdf)

That's from this link: DRL - Home Inspector (http://drl.wi.gov/prof/homi/def.htm)

Now, if you're claiming to be operating under: "An individual who constructs, repairs or maintains improvements to residential real property, if the individual conducts home inspections only as part of his or her business of constructing, repairing or maintaining improvements to real property and if the individual does not describe himself or herself as a registered home inspector or convey the impression that he or she is a registered home inspector." You should be too ASHAMED to admit this is your own debacle and that you haven't a clue how it should be done:


I actually suggested routing them along the floor, then vertical to the tub to prevent accidental breakage.

[Ken Rowe]

Why would I do that? expecially since WI requires "home inspectors" to be licensed, and the only Licensed Home Inspector in Wisconsin with a last name of Rowe has a first name of Robert, and a middle initial D, and in my book that doesn't = Ken Rowe, "Home Inspector", legal to inspect a home in Wisconsin, and why should I repeat a question, you don't answer them, (asked a question in first post on this topic).

Wisconsin DRL - Credential Lookup (http://online.drl.wi.gov/LicenseLookup/LicenseLookup.aspx)

A home inspector is an individual who, for compensation, examines the observable systems and components of improvements to residential real property that are readily accessible.
No individual may act as a home inspector, use the title "home inspector", use any title or description that implies that he or she is a home inspector or represent himself or herself to be a home inspector unless the individual is registered under Chapter 440, Subchapter X, Wis. Stats. (http://www.legis.state.wi.us/statutes/Stat0440.pdf)

That's from this link: DRL - Home Inspector (http://drl.wi.gov/prof/homi/def.htm)

Now, if you're claiming to be operating under: "An individual who constructs, repairs or maintains improvements to residential real property, if the individual conducts home inspections only as part of his or her business of constructing, repairing or maintaining improvements to real property and if the individual does not describe himself or herself as a registered home inspector or convey the impression that he or she is a registered home inspector." You should be too ASHAMED to admit this is your own debacle and that you haven't a clue how it should be done:

LOL, How often do you think they update their web site? Maybe you should give them a call or maybe a letter. (hint) do you really believe there are only 106 licensed home inspectors in the entire state of Wisconsin as indicated on their site?) And, while we're talking credentials, you show me yours and I'll show you mine. If you're too afraid to post them publicly I would suggest you stop trying to "help".

[Jerry Peck]

I still disagree. Minimum Fixture Clearances means clearance between fixtures. Pipes are not fixtures.


Ken,

Before you make yourself look sillier than you already have made yourself look, read the code section below. IT SHOULD answer your question, if you can read.

From the 2006 IPC. (red, bold and underlining are mine)
- 405.3.1 Water closets, urinals, lavatories and bidets. A water closet, urinal, lavatory or bidet shall not be set closer than 15 inches (381 mm) from its center to any side wall, partition, vanity or other obstruction, or closer than 30 inches (762 mm) center-to-center between adjacent fixtures. There shall be at least a 21-inch (533 mm) clearance in front of the water closet, urinal, lavatory or bidet to any wall, fixture or door. Water closet compartments shall not be less than 30 inches (762 mm) wide and 60 inches (1524 mm) deep (see Figure 405.3.1).

Let me know if I need to explain "or other obstruction" to you. :rolleyes:

[Ken Rowe]

Ken,

Before you make yourself look sillier than you already have made yourself look, read the code section below. IT SHOULD answer your question, if you can read.

From the 2006 IPC. (red, bold and underlining are mine)
- 405.3.1 Water closets, urinals, lavatories and bidets. A water closet, urinal, lavatory or bidet shall not be set closer than 15 inches (381 mm) from its center to any side wall, partition, vanity or other obstruction, or closer than 30 inches (762 mm) center-to-center between adjacent fixtures. There shall be at least a 21-inch (533 mm) clearance in front of the water closet, urinal, lavatory or bidet to any wall, fixture or door. Water closet compartments shall not be less than 30 inches (762 mm) wide and 60 inches (1524 mm) deep (see Figure 405.3.1).

Let me know if I need to explain "or other obstruction" to you. :rolleyes:


JP, yes I understand that. However, the diagram previously submitted did not say this. It referred only to fixtures. It did not mention "other obstructions" and that's my argument. I'm not one to read into or assume anything.

[Jerry Peck]

JP, yes I understand that. However, the diagram previously submitted did not say this. It referred only to fixtures. It did not mention "other obstructions" and that's my argument. I'm not one to read into or assume anything.

Which gets back to you apparently not knowing and not understanding the code and where that drawing came from.

Which is why you keep trying to defend your position, a position based either on ignorance, lack of knowledge, or simply that you cannot admit when you are wrong.

Either way, the result is the same - you are wrong.

[Billy Stephens]

.
that's my argument.
.
* maybe pictures no reading or Interruption of Diagrams required.
.
Help I've Fallen and Can"t Get Up ! :confused:
* or admit I could have been ( shall I whisper It ? ) WRONG !

or

It was just a Little Flame " Just Got Out of Hand. " :o

or

My Head is So Far Up The Elephant" **** I'm Blind ? :eek:
.
.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

LOL, How often do you think they update their web site? Maybe you should give them a call or maybe a letter. (hint) do you really believe there are only 106 licensed home inspectors in the entire state of Wisconsin as indicated on their site?) And, while we're talking credentials, you show me yours and I'll show you mine. If you're too afraid to post them publicly I would suggest you stop trying to "help".

Hey genius (106) is the database LIST number i.e. profession or credential category, not the total number of licensed individuals in that category of licensing (Home Inspector) in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin DRL - Credential Lookup - Credential List (http://online.drl.wi.gov/LicenseLookup/CredentialList.aspx)

Ah and the list is up to date (refreshed Hourly - during stated business hours according to that page) - and you ain't on it.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

JP, yes I understand that. However, the diagram previously submitted did not say this. It referred only to fixtures. It did not mention "other obstructions" and that's my argument. I'm not one to read into or assume anything.


No it "said" MINIMUM FIXTURE CLEARANCES. Within it says "Clearance" in several places along with a number followed by the inches sign. Despite your assertion of an insertion of the word "between" previously that wasn't part of the title nor appears on the figure.

It diagramed "CLEARANCE" i.e. 21" in front of Lav, 24" shower, 21" in front of WC (although MPC its 24"), 15" center to side clearance of WC. Perhaps you don't know how to read the word "clearance". Can you SEE the word Clearance within the diagrams contained on the Figure itself? (hint: expand the view to full screen, perhaps you're scroll bar "challenged").

See your argument is your own ignorance or stupidity, you're obviously one to NOT READ ANYTHING this also seems to include the requirement to have a license to do home inspections in the state of Wisconsin.

[Scott Patterson]

Who is H.G. Watson Sr.?

[Ken Rowe]

No it "said" MINIMUM FIXTURE CLEARANCES. Within it says "Clearance" in several places along with a number followed by the inches sign. Despite your assertion of an insertion of the word "between" previously that wasn't part of the title nor appears on the figure.

It diagramed "CLEARANCE" i.e. 21" in front of Lav, 24" shower, 21" in front of WC (although MPC its 24"), 15" center to side clearance of WC. Perhaps you don't know how to read the word "clearance". Can you SEE the word Clearance within the diagrams contained on the Figure itself? (hint: expand the view to full screen, perhaps you're scroll bar "challenged").

See your argument is your own ignorance or stupidity, you're obviously one to NOT READ ANYTHING this also seems to include the requirement to have a license to do home inspections in the state of Wisconsin.

Apparently you have no clue on how to read or interpret the diagram. Arrows pointing to a bathtub and stool with a number and the words minimum clearance means the minimum clearance between the fixture.

And before we discuss my credentials further how about you coming clean with your real name, a real city of residence and maybe a credential or two. Until then I can only assume your one of the master inspectors who've done 1000 hours of education but never performed an inspection.

[Ken Rowe]

Who is H.G. Watson Sr.?
He's a master inspector who's had 1000 hours of training but never performed an inspection. Apparently he has no experience with blue prints either.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

SP, you know who I am stop playing games. I realize you're bitter, have a personal axe to grind, a centrally insecure and low opinion of yourself, and that you have a warped opinion of P.E.s especially those with even more letters that follow, and anyone with (decades) more experience in Construction Litigation and hundreds of cases as an EW, but enough about my quarter of a century of teaching, decades of professional public and private work, and just where and how one can find information about me when authorized is, already. Perhaps its time to test the waters again for an Umbrella. :eek:

[Ken Rowe]

SP, you know who I am stop playing games. I realize you're bitter, have a personal axe to grind, a centrally insecure and low opinion of yourself, and that you have a warped opinion of P.E.s especially those with even more letters that follow, and anyone with (decades) more experience in Construction Litigation and hundreds of cases as an EW, but enough about my quarter of a century of teaching, decades of professional public and private work, and just where and how one can find information about me when authorized is, already. Perhaps its time to test the waters again for an Umbrella. :eek:

So in other words, just an internet troll with no inspection experience. Otherwise he's use his real name and list his credentials.

[Cobra Cook]

Again, you do not need to run 3/4 pipe to a toilet, sink or tub under any code no way, no how and most of all no reason. Hot water tanks yes but not any of the above. Some commercial sinks require it where there are mop sinks or triple, deep sinks with no restrictions on the spout, but not a home which is the subject of this forum. Toilets and sinks only have a 3/8 water supply line connecting them and that is reduced inside to less than that. Tub and shower valves have 3/8 or 1/2 inch connection and are reduced internally to maximum flow and gpm. Why on earth would you have to under any circumstance need to run a 3/4 line to feed those appliances? :rolleyes: HG I’m glad you did point out that the piping is not considered an appliance as another writer stated earlier. Lets face it if it looks like crap then most of the time it is crap, I do not buy the reasoning that it may have been temporary so that the plumber or others could shower or painters could wash their brushes. If this was on septic system paint will kill it. If, it was just temporary then plastic lines would have been much easier and cheaper to install than that pretty copper tubing and really clean neat looking bends. As a home inspector when I see, if I ever do see it my question to the seller would be did some one get a permit to do it? if they could produce a permit passed by the county or city then there would be little recourse except to tell the buyer in your report that it is unsafe due to the hot water lines being so close to your feet.:eek: If that does not suck a t--d back up, nothing would.

[Cobra Cook]

Can some one point me in the right direction on how to upload a picture to this site?:confused:

[Ron Bibler]

Can some one point me in the right direction on how to upload a picture to this site?:confused:

Look at the post box. you see the paper clip. click on that. click on browse
find your image. select then click up load. and close. then go to perview post to see your post with the image.

Best

Ron

[Cobra Cook]

I did that but it said my photos are too big, i tried to make them smaller but? thanks for the responce

[Billy Stephens]

.
i tried .........but?
.
....
.

[Billy Stephens]

.
i tried........... but?
.
....
.

[Ted Menelly]

Can some one point me in the right direction on how to upload a picture to this site?:confused:

When you reply to a post, below where you are typing your reply, scroll down and you will see upload pics. Click on browse, go to your pic, double click, Waite until it stops spinning and then click on upload. If you click on the picture and immediately click the submit button the picture won't be finished uploading. Be patient

[Billy Stephens]

I did that but it said my photos are too big, i tried to make them smaller but? thanks for the responce


When you reply to a post, below where you are typing your reply, scroll down and you will see upload pics. Click on browse, go to your pic, double click, Waite until it stops spinning and then click on upload. If you click on the picture and immediately click the submit button the picture won't be finished uploading. Be patient
.
Ted,

Reading Isn't your Strong Suit. :D

The Lad stated He tried that But His Stuff was Too Big.

Try Here Bome's Image Resizer - Bome Software (http://www.bome.com/tools/resizer/)
.

[James Foy]

I did that but it said my photos are too big, i tried to make them smaller but? thanks for the responce
You will need to resize your photos. Windows has a resizer available with their power tools. You can also download Faststone Image Viewer for free, it has resizing abilities and is a good program.

I love reading the posts with all the flying insults. I appreciate the entertainment. Thank you all.

[Cobra Cook]

I do too, Thanks i will try when i get back in town

[Inspector 3500]

I don't have my code book with me or I would cite the section, but there is a provision against piping, DWV and water lines from interfering with or blocking normal operation of the house.

An easy example is a pipe running in front of a window.

Another provision requires the piping to be protected from damage.

I would use both of those calls If I were the inspector on this job.

Ray

[Wayne Carlisle]

Inspector 3500I don't have my code book with me or I would cite the section, but there is a provision against piping, DWV and water lines from interfering with or blocking normal operation of the house.

I would sure like to see that section of the code!

Inspector 3500Another provision requires the piping to be protected from damage.


There's nothing in the code about protection of piping in this situation in the IRC.


P2603.2.1 Protection against physical damage.

In concealed locations, where piping, other than cast-iron or galvanized
steel, is installed through holes or notches in studs,
joists, rafters or similar members less than 1.5 inches (38
mm) from the nearest edge of the member, the pipe shall be
protected by shield plates. Protective shield plates shall be a
minimum of 0.062-inch-thick (1.6 mm) steel, shall cover
the area of the pipe where the member is notched or bored
and shall extend a minimum of 2 inches (51 mm) above sole
plates and below top plates.



P2603.3 Breakage and corrosion.


Pipes passing through or under walls shall be protected from breakage. Pipes passing
through concrete or cinder walls and floors, cold-formed steel
framing or other corrosive material shall be protected against
external corrosion by a protective sheathing or wrapping or
other means that will withstand any reaction from lime and acid
of concrete, cinder or other corrosive material. Sheathing or
wrapping shall allowfor expansion and contraction of piping to
prevent any rubbing action. Minimum wall thickness of material
shall be 0.025 inch (0.64 mm).

[Ryan Stouffer]

What about providing protection against mechanical damage?

[Billy Stephens]

.
Ted,

Reading Isn't your Strong Suit. :D

The Lad stated He tried that But His Stuff was Too Big.

Try Here Bome's Image Resizer - Bome Software (http://www.bome.com/tools/resizer/)
.


You will need to resize your photos. Windows has a resizer available with their power tools. You can also download Faststone Image Viewer for free, it has resizing abilities and is a good program.

I love reading the posts with all the flying insults. I appreciate the entertainment. Thank you all.
.
Click on Bome's Link and Go To The Very Bottom and a FREE BETA Version is Available.;)
.
Dang Now Where Did I Leave My Fly Swatter ? :D
.

[Inspector 3500]

Hi Wayne,

In the 2008 Oregon Code cycle (2006 IRC and UPC), the state dropped the plumbing and electrical sections from the residential code. Guess they thought why have a bastardized versions that referred you back to the UPC and NEC for items not covered in the IRC and just go with the real thing. So, I'm not sure of the IRC code sections but if you look a little further down from the sections you were quoting, say 2603.4,5, and 6 you should find something like this. Please excuse my paraphrasing from memory.

UPC/OPSC 313.2 or 3 All piping in connection with a plumbing system shall be so installed so that piping and connections shall not be subject to undue strains and stresses and provisions will be made for expansion and contraction and structural settlement........

UPC/OPSC 313.4 or 5 Piping subject to corrosion or erosion or mechanical damage shall be protected in an approved manor.

UPC/OPSC 308 or 9 Plumbing piping shall not block or prevent the use of doors and windows or any building function.

If you can't find these or need the exact code reference, I can get those for you tomorrow.

Hope this helps...:)

Ray

[Wayne Carlisle]

Inspector 3500

From my take on the pictures this is a residential application, so the IRC would be the code that dictates what is required.

Also in our area, don't know about the original posters area, but we are on the International Codes.

There is a section in the IPC that could be used in this situation IF this were a commercial installation.


305.9 Protection of components of plumbing system. Components
of a plumbing system installed along alleyways, driveways,
parking garages or other locations exposed to damage
shall be recessed into the wall or otherwise protected in an
approved manner.

This would be a stretch because I feel the intent of this section is talking about exterior plumbing.

I found the Oregon Code online, but how would these sections apply to a situation like the original post? What type mechanical damage could occur?

I still don't believe there is anything in the code that addresses something like this installation. Dumb code maybe!

[Phil Brody]

What building code should have is a brief explanation of intent in plain English so everybody doesn't have to become a lawyer. Do the pipes pose a reasonable danger as configured. Let's see what the inspector says.

[A.D. Miller]

What building code should have is a brief explanation of intent in plain English so everybody doesn't have to become a lawyer. Do the pipes pose a reasonable danger as configured. Let's see what the inspector says.

PB: The engineers who concoct the model codes are not real people, but merely theoretical constructs taking up valuable space. This does not allow for the interjection of that fleeting concept we call common sense.:D

[Jerry Peck]

Do the pipes pose a reasonable danger as configured.


"reasonable danger"?

No. But they pose an UNreasonable danger and an obstruction, which is not allowed.

[Wayne Carlisle]

"reasonable danger"?

No. But they pose an UNreasonable danger and an obstruction, which is not allowed.

And where is this stated? Is it just what the HI determines?

[Jerry Peck]

And where is this stated?

It's stated in the codes.

That is the reason for the codes.

And the clearances required at plumbing fixtures.

[Ted Menelly]

OK

A little bitty kid (male, female, does not matter, is standing there when mum just got finished running her bath. Plenty of scalding hot water to get the crud off (for those redneck wifes :p ). The little kid falls face first on the scalding pipe and gets his, her, arms tangled in the pipes and mommy hesitates for a second before catching on what just happened.......................................... ............


Wayne. As an inspector for the city I certainly hope you do right it up. You certainly have the right and it is the right thing to do. That little kid goes to the hospital to get the burned flesh taken care of (of course mom can come also) the Doc can only do so much. The beautiful little girl or handsome young man has a facial scar for life because Wayne did not write up an obvious safety item.

Pretty much the end of discussion on this thread.

I am done now.

[Billy Stephens]

I am done now.
.

Well It's About Time.
*do you Pinkey Promise? :D
.

[Wayne Carlisle]

Ted, yes I would write it up but I don't know what code I would site for this being a violation.

If someone called your hand on it.....as a municipal inspector, what section of the code does this violate?

[brian schmitt]

wayne,
check out post#65 for several citations. also cite section 407.6 upc that requires 15" from the center of the toilet to a sidewall or obstruction. i would definately consider the piping arrangement as an obstruction.

[Ted Menelly]

Yeah

What Brian said :)

[Wayne Carlisle]

Yeah but look at post 66 where I answered. The sections stated were in the UPC or IPC. These two codes are for commercial installations. This does not appear to be a commercial installation.

Is it a poor installation and create a hazard? Yes!

However, show me in the 2006 IRC where this violates code.

Section 307 deals with "fixture" clearances. It appears the original picture has the fixture clearance.

P2603.2.1 Protection from Physical Damage talks about pipes in concealed locations.

P2603.3 Breakage and Corrosion talks about pipes passing through or under walls, Pipes passing through concrete or cinder walls and floors, cold-formed steel framing or other corrosive material being protected.

From what I am reading, no one has posted a section of the IRC where this is a violation.

[brian schmitt]

wayne,
in caleefornia we don't use the irc so the upc (cpc) would apply to residential and commercial. i guess the irc does not have similar language to upc 407.6?

[Wayne Carlisle]

I'll buy that!:)

[Jerry Peck]

However, show me in the 2006 IRC where this violates code.


See post #40 above.

:D

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

The UPC is not limited to commercial installations where it is adopted as the plumbing code in certain states. Many States have adopted the IRC without adopting its plumbing section (which is IPC based) and instead utilize UPC (which is tougher) or their own plumbing code.

I haven't checked lately, but at one point only 24 states had adopted the IPC and/or the IRC (where it derives its plumbing section from the IPC) with out deleting its plumbing section and substituting the UPC or its own plumbing code which was not IPC based.

[Wayne Carlisle]

See post #40 above.

:D

That's the IPC! :p

HG, Texas has adopted the IRC.

[Mike Schulz]

It has shut off valves at the floor. I say drill a line of small holes along the pipe and use it as a baday.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

That's the IPC! :p

HG, Texas has adopted the IRC.

Okay, so you SAY, but what is your POINT and why you addressing ME with that "information" or "opinion" and tongue sticking out symbol?!? :confused:


Hmmm. Title 16 is sunset in Texas. So there went a statewide standard for workmanship/quality/warranty. TRCC (Texas Residential Construction Commission) kaput now, Yes? (hey I'm retired and no longer any base in TX; one would think you would/should know what changed Aug 31 & Sept 15, 2009, I don't have to know). Clickable link to News release posted on TRCC site: August 20, 2009 (http://www.trcc.state.tx.us/Publications/NewsReleases/09_20_09_Sunset_FAQs.asp) . With Title 16 (and its Chapter 430, have you read it?) expired. However when in effect it stated clearly in Sec. 430.001(d):




--(d) The International Residential Code for One and Two Family Dwellings that applies to nonelectrical aspects of residential construction for the purposes of the limited statutory warranties and building and performance standards adopted under this section is:

---(1) for residential construction located in a municipality or the extraterritorial jurisdiction of a municipality, the version of the International Residential Code applicable to nonelectrical aspects of residential construction in the municipality under 214.212, Local Government Code;

---(2) for residential construction located in an unincorporated area not in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of a municipality, the version of the International Residential Code applicable to the non electrical aspects of residential construction in the municipality that is the county seat of the county in which the construction is located; and

---(3) for residential construction located in an unincorporated area in a county that does not contain an incorporated area, the version of the International Residential Code (minus electrical provisions) that existed on May 1, 2001 (2000 ed) & 1999 NEC.


Title 16, Texas Residential Construction Commission Act (clickable link to pdf document): http://www.trcc.state.tx.us/policy/resources/08242007_Title_16.pdf

Which IIRC was consistant regarding the status of the IRC in TX - meaning local ammendments, different versions and no overall consistant state-wide version of anything regarding the IRC it depends on the jurisdiction/extrajurisdictional (local) authority except by default should there be no local adoption - and that's 2000 IRC minus electrical plus 99 NEC Local Government Code, Chapter 214, as ammended by the addition of SubChapter G, by 77(R) SB 365. Has that been changed or ammended recently? You'd have to tell me.

Home rule. IIRC some counties and cities Authorities Having Jurisdiction aren't even using a 2006 edition based version of their own code adoptions. Default was whatever was adopted at the time in 2001 (which was the 2000 edition of the IRC minus all electrical references plus the NEC version published on or before May 1, 2001 - 1999 NEC) so the code edition basis could be older. Frankly I don't remember or recall and don't have access to my library of 2000 IRC and have no intention of reviewing every County Seat City and individual city in TX for ammendments to guess what you seem to demand of others. A citation for the IPC was provided deal with it.

Cities and county seat cities can adopt and ammend codes depends on who has jurisdiction or extra-jurisdictional area. You are unknown location "Texas". Try reading your local authorities adoption and amendments. Start by reading their version of R102.4. IIRC Dallas (City) its either ordance chapter 54 or 57 is their version of IRC. What do you think the IPC is? or the P chapters of the unammended IRC come from (IPC based unless not adopted or ammended by local authority)?

Then you check it out and find a cross referenced section citation.

Okay got it yet (where the plumbing (IPC) mechanical (IMC) and electrical (NEC - NFPA 70 or 70A) sections of the IRC original edition come from before ammended/partially or fully adopted)? Of course many cities and counties have their own rehab code too.

In conclusion Wayne Carlile, TX doesn't have any authority over either Minnesota (UPC based plumbing code) or Wisconsin (IPC based IIRC). The supposed original topic location. The UPC(Uniform Plumbing Code) and the IPC (International Plumbing Code) are not limited in application to commercial occupancies. Despite your prior assertion. In practice I do my best to address responses applicable to the question and the questioner, this includes referencing the code reference for the jurisdiction of the subject.

[Jerry Peck]

That's the IPC! :p


While the wording is different in the IRC, the intent is the same. :p

[Wayne Carlisle]

HG, the tongue sticking out was aimed at Jerry Peck. That's why the quote was posted above my comment and then I specifically addressed your comment. If you thought I was sticking my tongue out at you...I'll suck it back in until Jerry reads it...and apparently he did because he threw the same thing back at me!:)

HG, you made a comment about the UPC and I was just stating that Texas was under the IRC for plumbing so the UPC does not come into play with my question about a residential inspection. "Show me in the IRC".

Saint Paul Minnesota is under the 2006 IRC So I think the discussion has everything to do with my comments. Besides discussions like this is how we learn...or should I say let our feelings be known about our interpretations.


While the wording is different in the IRC, the intent is the same. :p

The intent? The intent is not the same or the wording would have been in there. Besides intent is only interpretation.

As I said before I would write it up but there is not specific wording in the code that addresses this type of installation. Maybe in intent is supposed to be there, but the wording is not specific.

If a contractor wanted to argue the installation he would have a good argument. Would he wuin? No! Because the AHJ has the final word.

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

I inititally quoted Minnesota code. Thats when KR claimed he was inspecting in WI (without required license).

Few locales adopt any code edition without some ammendments. Your own state when making IRC the default (2000 edition) at the time it still used its own electrical code - specifically did not adopt any portion of the IRC that had to do with anything electrical and substituted the NEC - because that earlier edition was using its own "electrical code". Many that adopt the IRC do not adopt the plumbing chapters or mechanical chapters, inititally and especially those that were UBC based, they often retain UPC and UMC.

You check the citation from the IRC I gave you, See if it refers to the IPC or UPC as adopted in your city or county seat city whichever is applicable. The UPC is toughter than the IPC.

[Ken Rowe]

It doesn't really matter anymore. The AHJ approved it.

[Mike Schulz]

:eek: WTF

[Wayne Carlisle]

I told you guys. Nothing in black and white to prevent this!

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

It doesn't really matter anymore. The AHJ approved it.


I don't believe you. Esp. since you later claimed you inspected and this was in Wisconsin. It is inconsistant with the WISCONSIN PLUMBING CODE, Uniform Dwelling Code (Ch. 20-25). Which by the way also (like MINNESOTA) requires 24 (twenty-four) inches in front of the bowl and clearance 15 inches from center side to side.

Additional citations from the Wisconsin Administrative Code prohibit what you pictured as approvable. Including cleaning fixture and floor area, bending radius, approved materials, and other issues previously indicated before you claimed you were inspecting in WI (without a license).

Only the department has ultimate authority and the few cities with authority do NOT have the authority to approve something inconsistant with the Department. There are rulings as well.

See Wisconsin Administrative Code Ch. 84, Comm 84.20 (5) PLUMBING FIXTURES AND PLUMBING APPLIANCES (o) Water Closets. 4. A water closet may not be located closer than 15 inches from its center to any side wall, partition, vanity, or other obstruction, nor closer than 30 inches cetner to center, between water closets. There shall be at least 24 inches clearance in front of a water closet to any wall, fixture or door. Note: See Appendix for further explanatory material.

See Appendix to Comm 84, A-84.20(5) SPACING OF PLUMBING FIXTURES, specifically figures A-87.20-1 and A-84.20-3. They are the further explanatory material regarding the above quotation.

You might also bother to review Ch. 82, subchapter I Intent and Basic Requirements Comm 82.10 (1) INTENT (h) All plumbing fixtures shall be installed so as to provide adequate spacing and accessibility for the intended use and cleaning. then read on and review (2) BASIC REQUIREMENTS. Few more subchapters 82-21 Testing and Inspection (1) TESTING (c) Inspection of one-and 2-family dwellings shall be in accordance with ss. Comm 20.08 to 20.11. Back over to Ch. 20 Administration and enforcement will direct you to Ch. 25 Plumbing which will take you back to yep, you guessed it, The Wisconsin Plumbing Code (Ch. 81 definitions) Chs. 82 to 87 and Ch. 91. Don't assume, don't have to the language and definitions are clear. Threads, compressions, for the tub must be out of the sprinkle zone otherwise a high hazard. The toilet and urinal spacing from center are "Black water" use cleaning zones.

There are at least four other reasons and citations why as pictured are not passable and your story not plausable according to the Wisconsin Administrative Code. Including 82.40 (7)(h) 1. a.; 84.20(4)(b) 1. and 82.03 (1), (2) and especially (3).
82.03 (3) "A department interpretation of the requirements in this chapter shall supersede any differing interpretation by a lower level jurisdiction. A department decision on the application of the requirements in this chapter shall supersede any differing decision by a lower level jurisdiction."

[H.G. Watson, Sr.]

Wayne Carlisle, yes it IS in "black and white" and diagrams from appendixes from both Minnesota Plumbing Code and Wisconsin Plumbing Code. They are both VERY CLEAR.

You are apparently intentionally ignorant of how either of these states adopted/ammend/ wrote their codes it has been spelled out twice now, and you've been pointed to IRC reference as well. you should know better if you are what you say you are just south of Ft. Worth, TX.


Saint Paul Minnesota is under the 2006 IRC


Minnesota Plumbing Code applies to plumbing matters in Minnesota. However, as I pointed out to you, and as KR has claimed, despite his profile location, he "claimed" this inspection situation and property was encountered in Wisconsin (where he is not authorized to inspect).


So I think the discussion has everything to do with my comments. Besides discussions like this is how we learn...or should I say let our feelings be known about our interpretations.

No it doesn't. Besides, the INTENT of the plumbing codes in MN and WI are clearly defined, as is WHO shall MAKE INTERPRETATIONS.




The intent? The intent is not the same or the wording would have been in there. Besides intent is only interpretation.

Nope. The intent is defined and spelled out in the Code. In the Wisconsin Plumbing Code it is also clearly spelled out WHO has the authority to make any futher interpertation. Intent and Interpretation are NOT THE SAME THING. One understand WHAT the INTENT is, and WHAT has been STATED AS THE INTENT, and the construction of guidelines on determining the correct INterpretation before one endeavors to do so. The Interpretation Authority in WI is the Department, not the local Inspector of the limited cities that try to do so.


As I said before I would write it up but there is not specific wording in the code that addresses this type of installation. Maybe in intent is supposed to be there, but the wording is not specific.
Yes there is specific wording in the code that addresses this. The intent is stated in the code, and the wording is specific. One does need to know what it means.


If a contractor wanted to argue the installation he would have a good argument. Would he wuin? No! Because the AHJ has the final word. No he wouldn't; don't know what wuin means; No the local inspector does not have the final word, that's not how it works in Wisc. and it is not code compliant even as an existing or previous installation since work was done and a permit was pulled (according to the original poster's continuing back-story).

[Jerry Peck]

The intent? The intent is not the same or the wording would have been in there. Besides intent is only interpretation.

Wayne,

From the IPC Commentary:
"A minimum space is necessary around a water closet, urinal, lavatory and bidet to use and clean the fixture properly."

From the IRC Commentary:
"Plumbing fixtures require space around them for use and cleaning purposes."

Seems to be the same intent to me.

[Ken Rowe]

It really doesn't matter if you believe me or not H.G.since your not an inspector. If you're so worried about me being licensed or not your welcome to try to do something about it. More than whining on the internet anyways.

I spoke with the agent today who informed me that the plumbing permit was closed with no repairs mandated, even though I did call out those pipes on my report.

My guess is the Code Enforcement Officer never went in the house.

[Ken Lyons]

I spoke with the agent today who informed me that the plumbing permit was closed with no repairs mandated, even though I did call out those pipes on my report.

My guess is the Code Enforcement Officer never went in the house.


We hear that a lot. And when something is discovered later, the inspector says they didn't inspect that room or space. During the Orlando boom, they only visited 1 in 25 approved houses... many lawsuits later they are reinspecting as issues arise. Most of the builders are gone or belly up. So if you buy tract property, a permit might be worthless depending on if the inspector actually did their job. --And we know how builders love cut corners.

[Phil Brody]

Ken did it right, called it out and let it take it's course.