I

1



r
i
Bureau of Standards

JUI\ 3 1939

I
National Bureau of Standards

JUL 16 1943

The program of research on building materials and structures undertaken by the

National Bureau of Standards is planned with the assistance of the following advisorycommittee designated by the Subcommittee on Design and Construction of the Central

Housing Committee.

TECHNICAL RESEARCH GROUP

Walter Junge, Federal Housing Administration, Chairman

A. C. Shire, United States Housing Authority, Vice Chairman

A. G. Bear, Vincent B. Phelan,

Veterans' Administration. National Bureau of Standards.

Pierre Blouke, E. A. Poynton,

Home Owners' Loan Corporation. Office of Indian AfiFairs. C. W. Chamberlain, j^^^ H Schaefer,

Procurement Division. Procurement Division.

Jos. M. DallaValle, Gforge W Trayer

Public Health Service. tt -j. j ^ i. o Umted States forest Service.

Hugh L. Dryden,

National Bureau of Standards. Elsmere J. Walters,

G E Knox Quartermaster Corps, War Department.

Bureau of Yards and Docks, Navy

Department.

Steeling R. March, Secretary

The program is administered and coordinated by the following staff committee of

the Bureau:

Hugh L. Dryden, Chairman

P. H. Bates W. E. Emley A. S. McAllister

H. C. Dickinson G. E. F. Lundell H. S. Rawdon

The Forest Products Laboratory of the United States Department of Agriculture

is cooperating with the National Bureau of Standards in studies of wood constructions.

How To Purchase

BUILDING MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES REPORTS

On request, the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C, will place your name on a special mailing list to receive notices of new reports in this

series as soon as they are issued. There will be no charge for receiving such notices. An alternative method is to deposit with the Superintendent of Documents the sum of $5.00,

with the request that the reports be sent to you as soon as issued, and that the cost thereof be charged against your deposit. This wUl provide for the mailing of the publications without

delay. You wiU be notified when the amount of your deposit has become exhausted. A list of the reports now available is given on page III of the cover of this report.

If 100 copies or more of any report are ordered at one time, a discount of 25 percent is allowed. Send all orders and remittances to the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing

Office, Washington, D. C.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE • Harry L. Hopkins, Secretary

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS • Lyman J. Briggs, Director

BUILDING MATERIALS

and STRUCTURES

REPORT BMS19

Preparation and Revision

of Building Codes

by

GEORGE N. THOMPSON

ISSUED MAY, 1939

The National Bureau of Standards is a fact-finding organization;

it does not "approve" any particular material or method of construction. The technical findings in this series of reports are to be construed a(

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE • V\^ASHINGTON • I939

FOR SALE BY THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, WASHINGTON, D. C. • PRICE 15 CENTS
Foreword

EflBcient use of building materials depends not only on accurate knowledge of their

characteristics but also on the legal restrictions imposed by public authorities in the

interest of safety. If these restrictions do not recognize late developments in design

and construction that have been found to be safe, they may cause unnecessary expense,

prevent the free exercise of ingenuity in design, and discourage the introduction of new

materials and methods.

Under present conditions, most of the preparation and revision of building code

requirements is done by local officials or committees. There is available to them a great

and growing mass of basic material which must be examined and utilized in the development of local requirements. The selection of necessary features and the combination of

them mto a series of requirements that will be at once clear and reasonable is a task wliich

makes great demands upon those cbarged with this responsibility.

This report gives information on useful source material and its use, discusses principles and problems associated with building code requirements, and thus endeavors to indicate a procedure through which full advantage may be taken of developments in the

laboratory and in the field, while preserving the primary object of safeguarding the

public.

Lyman J. Briggs, Director.
Preparation and Revision of Building Codes

by GEORGE N. THOMPSON

CONTENTS

Page

Foreword ii

I. Introduction 1 II. What the building code is 3

III. Extent of code requirements. - 3 IV. Police power. 4

V. Effect on community 4 VI. Tests for codes 5 VII. Methods of starting code 6 VIII. Composition of local committee 6 IX. Study of city needs 7 X. Collection of available material 7 XI. Methods of preparing code 8 XII. Use of consultant 9

Page XIII. Code arrangement 9 XIV. Performance basis 10 XV. Use of standards 11 XVI. Acceptance of new materials and

methods 13 XVII. Rules and regulations 14 XVIII. Provisions for changes in code 15 XIX. Enforcement 15 XX. Board of appeal 16 XXI. Appendix 16 XXII. Conclusion 17 XXIII. Selected references 17

ABSTRACT

Building construction has been subjected for many

years to legal control in the interest of safety and health. While there is general agreement on the need for this, specific applications in the form of building codes have

been frequently criticized on the grounds of imposing

excessive expense and of failing to make adjustments to changing conditions. The responsibility for preparing or revising bviilding codes usually falls upon local committees. These are

called upon to do a great deal of tedious and exacting

work. One of their first problems is to determine

what source material is available and how they should

proceed. In this discussion, a description is given of how such

work is done and useful sources of technical information

are indicated. Some of the problems that are encountered by local committees are mentioned, including

what basic principles are involved; methods of presentation, arrangement, and numbering; advantages of using

national standards and ways of referring to them;

methods of recognizing new materials and new methods

of construction; extent of delegation of authority to the

building official and safeguards against arbitrary

action; and other questions of major importance.

An attempt has been made to place committees in possession of sufficient information to proceed in their work with a minimum of lost motion. Not all questions can be answered with finality, since the situation is complicated by the existence of proposals of nearly

equal merit and by differing judicial decisions. Such

differences will no doubt continue to exist for some time;

but they are not of sufficient importance to be allowed

to obscure the main objective of providing adequate

protection without creating too much of a drag on the

building industry. Constructive work in the field of

building-code requirements has been going on continuously for some time and will exert an ever increasing in- fluence. This discussion is offered to supplement such work and as a contribution to the orderly development

of good requirements.

I. INTRODUCTION

The need for reg'ulating building construction

in the interest of safety and health has been felt in many times and places wherever men have

lived under urban conditions. Evidence of this

is to be found in the Code of Hammurabi [1],^ which dealt with conditions in Babylon about

2250 B. C; in various Roman laws [2]; in

Fitz-EIwyne's Assize of Buildings [3], which

regulated construction in London in 1189; and

in a number of early colonial laws in this country [4] . Early legal restrictions were concerned

largely with the hazards of fire and collapse,

with health conditions appearing at a comparatively late date. In general, the nature of such

laws has broadened with the passage of time so

that, in addition to safety and health, they now

deal also with some aspects of morals and general welfare.

Requirements, in the form of building codes,

have come to be an accepted feature of modern

life in all our large cities and in many small ones.

1 Figures in brackets indicate ttie literature references at the end of this paper.

[1]
Like most restrictive legislation, they have

always been the object of some criticism; but

this has been intensified in the period since the

World War. In 1921 the Senate Connnittee on

Reconstruction and Production issued a report

[5] in which it was pouited out that buildingcode requirements varied widely and were one

source of unnecessarily high construction costs. Since that time various writers and speakers

have repeated these charges and have also re- ferred to lack of flexibility in deahng with new

materials and new methods of construction.

Much of this criticism is justified. However, it frequently fails to take into account the great

advances that have taken place in codes in re- cent years, and it constitutes a negative rather

than a constructive approach to the problem.

In order to effect further improvement, it is necessary to undertake the tedious and exact- ing task of analyzing present code deficiencies

and working out a pattern of requirements that

will assure the primary object of safety wlule

giving heed to legitimate economies and neces- sary adjustments to changing conditions.

In well over 100 cities and towns each year, work is undertaken on the preparation of a local building code, either as a revision of a former

document or as preparation of a completely

new series of requirements. Usually this work

is entrusted to a group of citizens chosen for

their special qualifications or interest. The re- sponsibility placed upon them is a heavy one.

Utilizing such materials as they can gather,

they m.ust proceed to draw up proposed requirements that, if observed, are to assure the safety

of building occupants and of those whose cus- tomary activities take them into and about

buildings. Yet they must keep an eye on the

eft'ect which such requirements will have on

building costs, since too rigid requirements may

so discourage building activity that not enough new construction will be erected to take care of

normal needs. Such local groups usually serve without pay and are called upon to contribute

a large amount of time and energy as a matter

of public service. They undertake their work

conscientiously but are often hampered by lack

of information about available material and how

to use it. Students of the subject have pointed out that

considerable progress could be made through

the adoption of state requirements, leaving

local vaxiations at a minimum. This suggestion

has met with some favor, but until it is generally

accepted the problem of developing complete

local requirements and of keeping them up to date will remain.

For some 20 years the National Bureau of

Standards has endeavored to provide helpful

information on building codes to a large number

of local committees and officials. Investigations carried on at the Bureau in regard to strength, fire resistance, and other characteristics of building materials have produced

results of direct usefulness in this field. During

the period 1921 to 1934, the Bureau supplied

the staft" and published the reports of the Department of Commerce BuHding Code Committee. At present, in addition to continued

technical research and contact with public

officials on building-code problems, the Bureau

is cooperating with the Building Code Correlating Committee of the American Standards

Association in the continued development of

recommended building-code requirements.

These activities have resulted in the accumulation of much material bearing on buUding-code

problems. It has become apparent through cor- respondence and other contacts that much the same problems occur in each community and

that a discussion of some of their more familiar

features wbuld serve a useful purpose. The

literature on the subject has been enriched in recent years by the writings of Burton, Millei,

Stegner, and others. These have made painstaking investigations of fundamental questions

and have recorded their conclusions at some

length. The literature is scattered, however,

and much of it is not readily available. Fre- quent reference to it will be made in this discussion.

The method of treatment employed here is in large part that of discussion rather than

specific recommendation. Great strides have

been made in recent years in bringing divergent

opinions about building codes into closer agree- ment, but the time has apparently not yet

arrived when it can be said with assurance that some one method of approach is best for all cases. There is a healthy disagreement on such

matters as arrangement of topics, ideal requirements versus realistic ones, possibilities of

[2]
simplification, and other matters. Those who

have followed such controversies over a period

of years are aware that variations in codes are diminishing. Some of the alternatives that re- main are, however, so closely equal in merit that

it is only fair to describe them in detail pending

the time when more conclusive evidence is obtainable.

II. WHAT THE BUILDING CODE IS

As already indicated, the building code is a

collection of legal requirements whose purpose

is to protect the safety, health, morals, and

general welfare of those in and about buildings.

The code attempts to do this by establishing a series of requirements covering such topics as

fire protection, strength of materials, light and

ventilation, sanitation, exits, and other matters

which have been foimd to need regulation. It

sets forth the least that will be acceptable in

each instance, leaving the designer or builder to go beyond this as far as he likes. It creates a system of supervision, making it necessary to obtain a permit to undertake work on a building

and providing for inspection of the structure by

public officials. It usually carries teeth in the

form of fines for violation of the code provisions

and gives authority to stop the work if neces- sary in the public interest. The usual type of building code covers re- quirements for construction, alteration, demolition, maintenance and repair, and other activities in connection with buildings and certain

other structures. Requirements for interior

equipment may or may not be included.

Example.—This ordinance provides for all matters

concerning the construction, remodeling, alteration,

repairing, maintenance, use, moving or removal of buildings and other structures and parts thereof, erected or to be erected in the city; the safety of workers and others during these operations and the

safe use of such buildings and structures. [6) The broad objectives are reflected in the

actual requirements. For instance, fire Umits

are established within which only buildings of

certain types of construction may be erected,

the object being to restrict the spread of fire in

the municipality. Similarly, maximum heights

for buildings are given. These are uniform

throughout the city for the same type of construction, fire protection being again the determining factor. Requirements concerning

alterations touch upon the delicate problem of

when old buildings must be brought up to the

standards fof new ones. The matter of demolition carries with it measures for determining

when a building is so unsafe or unsanitary as

to justify removal and by what procedure.

Provisions for maintenance and repair are bound up with social policies concerned with

how far it is expedient to force owners to keep

their buildings in conformity with present-day

practices. Thus, the contents of the code are something more than aroutine statement of technical details. They are, or can be, a dynamic

force in shaping the physical character of a community through the standards that are imposed.

III. EXTENT OF CODE REQUIREMENTS

It is weU to think of a proposed local building

code not as an isolated document of purely

local concern but as a part of a network of re- quirements that extends over the country.

There are some 1,500 local biulding codes and

a number of State codes [7]. Although such

codes are developed more or less independently

under present conditions, they have a common

objective and affect the work of professional

men and manufacturing concerns far beyond the

borders of the political units concerned. The

State building codes usually are limited to

certain types of buildings and may not apply

within the limits of incorporated areas. There

are also numerous State laws applying to special

occupancies, such as factories and schools. A

small number of counties have coimty building

codes.

The pattern of existing requirements is not

limited to those forms that have been mentioned but is further extended by zoning ordi- nances and housing codes. The former, adopted

locally in accordance with State enabling acts, regulate the height, use, and area of buildings

in different districts, so that the community can

develop in an orderly fashion. The latter, more frequently State measures, are concerned

with matters of light, ventilation, sanitation,

and safety features applying to residential

buildings. Wlien housing codes do not exist,

these matters are usually contained in building

codes. Finally, there are requirements concern-

[3]
ing the equipment of buildings, including the

pliunbing code, the electrical code, the elevator

code, and the boiler code. Custom differs as to whether these form chapters of the building code

or are separately published and perhaps separately administered. There are local traditions and

differences in mimicipal organization that ac- count for the varying treatment accorded these

subjects. Authorities agree that whether they

should be included in the building code or not

is largely a matter of local policy [8]. They are

closely related to the building code even when

not an integral part of it. It may be stated as a general principle that

where a State law is in existence, tliis takes

precedence over a municipal ordinance dealing

with the same subject, although the ordinance

may be more restrictive if this is desired [9]. Example of State code provision illustrating relationship

to local code.—This code shall not limit the power of

cities, villages and towns to make, or enforce, additional

or more stringent regulations, provided the same do not

conflict with this code or with any other order of the

Industrial Commission. [10] Example of local buildtng-code provision in same

State.—The provisions of this Code shall supplement

any laws of the State of Wisconsin relating to buildings.

Where requirements of the State Code and the provisions of this Code conflict, the stricter requirements

shall govern. [11] Exceptions to tliis occur in the case of some

home-rule cities where the municipal requirements are specifically put ahead of State laws

[12].

_ With such a multipHcity of measures to safe- guard the public, it is obvious that one of the

first things for a local committee to do is to estabhsh the place of its project in relation to other legal requirements that apply. Tliis can

only be done by assembling and comparing the

various documents that have been mentioned.

The limiting effects of State laws, the extent to wliich it is advisable to maintain harmony with

existing ordinances, or to absorb them, and the

advantages of keeping in step with the requirements of other communities in order to avoid

unnecessary confusion are all proper subjects

for consideration.

IV. POLICE POWER

The building code derives its justification

from the police power. This is the inherent

power of government to protect the people

against harmful acts of individuals insofar as matters of safety, health, morals, or the like are concerned [9]. It is a power forming the

basis for State acts and mimicipal ordinances

dealing with these matters and is of indefinite

extent, although certain limitations concerning

its use are to be found in the Federal and State

constitutions and in court decisions [13]. Fimdamentally, imder our system of government, the power resides in the State and may

be transmitted to local authorities through en- abling acts authorizing the adoption of building

requirements or may be conferred upon municipalities when a charter is granted . Although the use of the power has been more narrowly con- strued at some times than at others, there is an

apparent trend toward broadening its application to include many matters falling under the

general head of public welfare [13]. In order to have a working knowledge of how

the code-maldng power has come into the

hands of the local authorities and what restric- tions are placed upon it, it is well to consult

the State constitution, any pertinent State

enabling acts that confer this power on the

municipahty, and the provisions of the city

charter. The corporation counsel, or other

person designated to advise municipal officials on matters of law, is in a position to render

sldlled assistance in this matter.

V. EFFECT ON COMIVLUNITY

The influence of the building code on city

growth is greater than is ordinarily suspected.

The requirements, operating over a period of years, affect the ph3^sical character of the com- munity to a marked degree. There are other

effects wliich shoidd be realized. If the requirements are so severe as to impose building costs greater than those prevalent in other cities, new

industries may be diverted elsewhere, rents may

be increased, and other effects produced. If the permissible building heights and types of construction bear no relation to the city water

pressure and efficiency of the ffie department,

insurance rates may be affected. In a standard

method for rating cities for ffie-insurance purposes, the quality of the building code and of

[4]
its administration is a specific point [14, 15]. If peculiar requirements are made, as is sometimes done, necessitating the use of nonstandard

products, manufacturing processes may have

to be altered to meet the special reqmrements

of the municipality concerned. Thus, the code

can be a beneficent influence guiding the general course of construction in safe channels, or

it can be a means of hampering the orderly

growth of the community that it is supposed

to protect.

VI. TESTS FOR CODES

Building codes, being documents which limit

and restrain people in their activities, inevitably are targets for criticism. It is important

to know whether such criticism is valid or is frivolous and actuated by other than disinterested motives.

There are certain tests that can be applied

to an existing local code which will give some

indication of whether it is reasonably adequate

or is in need of a thorough overhauling. These

tests, together with any complaints that have

accumulated, constitute the basis for determination of what action, if any, is necessary.

The age of the code is one indication of its quality, for advances in the building art tend

to make provisions obsolete. Doubt is cast upon fully 20 percent of existing codes in this respect, for a recent survey disclosed that 10

percent of such codes are 20 years old or older,

while another 10 percent are from 15 to 20 years. Some further investigation is needed before

judgment can be rendered on this score, be- cause frequent amendments and supplementary

rulings of officials may have brought the code

into closer conformity with current practice

than the bare figures would indicate. However, these amendments have a tendency to

clutter up the code and make it increasingly

difficult to understand. A complete overhauling at intervals of not over 10 years, and

preferably at somewhat shorter intervals, is desirable.

Looking into the code itself, the next test is whether the contents are reasonably clear and

explicit and can be readily located. This

applies not only to the wording of individual

sections but to the way in which sections are put

together so that they form a logical series of

interrelated requirements . Experience with ambiguous provisions has led commentators to emphasize this point [16]. Certainly, if a

designer or builder is expected to observe the

law, he should be given a fair chance to ascertain what is required. It is equally true that

the administrative official should have the

backing of a document that leaves little or no room for argument. Ease of reference implies a complete index and adequate cross-referencing

wherever necessary.

What might be termed the underlying philosophy of the code as evident in its requirements

is also important. If it has been thought neces- sary to write into the code a great amount of minute directions and specifications, one of two

tilings may have happened: Changes in the art

of construction may have forced frequent

amendments or may be responsible for complaints that the particular tilings specified in

the code no longer apply. In either case a lack

of flexibility of adjustment to new conditions

is indicated. On the other hand, if the code is expressed in terms of what is required in the

way of strength, fire resistance, and so on, leaving the determination of what will do the

job to appropriate tests, a better chance for keeping requirements abreast of changing conditions will have been afforded.

A third way of appraising the code is to examine it for the extent to wliich national

standards have been used. These standards

for quality of materials, and in some cases for methods of construction, have been widely ac- cepted and furnish a definite basis for accepting

or rejecting proposed elements of construction.

Wlien advantage is not taken of these useful

devices, a doubt is cast on whether full use has

been made of all available methods for keeping

the code up to date. One tiling that should be

watched especially in this connection, however,

is the date of the standard used, if this is given.

The pages of codes are strewn with dead standards wliich have long since been superseded by

more modern requirements.

Evidence of careless draftsmansliip is another

cause for holding a code to be in need of revision.

Examples of actual errors in codes are the use

of the term "feet" for "inches"; two different

requirements for the same thing; transposed

[5]
column headings in stress tables ; and the use of the term "maximum" where "minimum" is meant, or vice versa. Such errors may be

patent because of their very absurdity and thus cause little harm, but they cast doubt on the

soundness of other provisions and tend to create

disrespect for the code as a whole.

If the examination of these general features

of the code has resulted in an unfavorable

reaction, examination may proceed to details. It will be found that the code contains certain

assumptions and estimates which may or may

not assure safety. Included will be requirements

about live and dead loads, column reduction

factors, permissible working stresses, thick- nesses of walls, and tliiclmesses of fire-protective coverings. The less these partake of the

character of estimates the more will they satisfy

the purpose for which they are intended. To

appraise them, it is necessary to compare them

with values suggested by outstanding authorities in the building-code field, references to which are available [17]. The attitude of the code toward acceptance

of new materials and new methods of construction is important. Innovations are multiplying today and are demanding equal treatment

with older materials which have proved their

worth. If clear and explicit requirements are lacking in regard to the procedure to be employed, the code is deficient in meeting one of the most pressing problems of buUding regulation today.

Examination of the features mentioned

should give a good idea of whether a few wellselected amendments will accomplish all that is needed or whether the task of preparing a new

code should be undertaken.

VII. METHODS OF STARTING NEW

CODE

The impetus for code improvement comes

from various sources. In the 1,500 communities where a building code of some sort exists

the local building official may call attention to

its shortcomings. If the official is alert he

will observe those points at which the code is not abreast of prevailing practice in other communities or of advances in engineering. He is in a pecuharly good position to observe and

record the shortcomings of the code in its dayby-day operations and to call attention to the

need for changes. Sometimes the code is made

the object of study by a local group such as the

local chapter of a professional society, a civic

association, or a business organization such as a

local board of trade or real estate board. These

bodies are in a position to adopt the initiative

where there is no code because of their facilities for study and observation and their contacts with similar bodies in other communities. In

whatever way presented, a suggestion that new

code requirements are desirable should be

accompanied hj a well-arranged list of arguments giving the evidence at hand. The local council or other legislative body can then

take cognizance of the situation and arrangements can be made for the appointment of a

representative committee to proceed with offi- cial sanction.

VIII. COMPOSITION OF LOCAL COMMITTEE

The committee which is to prepare a building

code should be selected with care. Most productive results are generally held to come from

a comparatively small body supplemented, if necessary, by special committees dealing with

specific problems [9]. In a large committee,

responsibility tends to become diffused and dis- cussion is likely to be prolonged beyond reasonable limits. A body of about seven members

has been foimd to operate efficiently. In

larger cities, it is sometimes desirable, in order

to give recognition to the great number of

groups affected, to establish a sizable group, but

in such cases the situation can be met through

creation of a comparatively small executive

committee empowered to lay out a working

plan, make subcommittee assignments, and

follow up the work in process. The composition of the smaller body may well

include representatives of the groups which

design buildings, of those who are responsible

for figuring stresses and strains, of those who

do the construction, and of those who finance

and manage the completed structures. It should also provide for ascertaining the point

of view of the responsible pubHc authorities

most concerned.

[6]
These general considerations point to the

selection of an architect, an engineer, a builder, an owner, the building official (if there is one),

and the fire chief. A member of the city

planning commission has also been suggested

[18] and a master mason or carpenter may also prove indispensable to the work. The numerous legal problems involved may make it advisable to include a lawyer.

From whatever group chosen, members

should be expected to bring to the work a broad and sympathetic understanding of the

problem before them and should realize that

they are acting, not as the jealous conservators

of some special point of view, but as representatives of the public in a matter of vital concern. Capacity to work together is one of the qualities

that has been emphasized [9]. Since the membership of the committee will normally be busy with their own affairs, it will be necessary to select a competent secretary

and to set up a staff and see that the work is pursued with diligence. When this is organized,

it is well to establish a progress schedule giving

estimated dates when various stages of the

work will be completed. This schedule may

not be Uved up to, but it will provide a definite

objective and can be adjusted as time goes on. EXAMPLE OF PROGRESS SCHEDULE

ACTIVITY DATE

(1) Organization meeting held and

collection of available material

started

(2) General method of treatment agreed upon, including arrangement,

form, method of numbering,

etc

(3) Assignments made to subcommittees or individuals

(4) Subcommittee reports due

(5) Draft of code completed

(6) Public hearings held

(7) Revisions incorporated and code

edited

(8) Report submitted with recom- mendations

Without some such means of measuring ac- complishment, the proceedings may drift along

for such a period that interest will die down.

IX. STUDY OF CITY NEEDS

Before work on a new code is started, it is well

to make a thorough survey to bring out the

resources and characteristics of the municipality.

This is necessary in order to deal intelligently

with such matters as fire limits, building heights,

and other matters. The physical lay-out of tlie city, the nature and location of its industries,

the prevailing heights of buildings and their

types of construction, the likelihood of severe wind and snowstorms, the efficiency of the fire department, the adequacy of the water-supply

system, the number and character of building

fires, the quahties of building materials custo- marily marketed, are all matters deserving of

attention. Consideration should also be given

to complaints about the existing code, if there

is one, and to suggestions for bringing it into

harmony with practice elsewhere. By thus

appraising the local situation, the committee

will be better qualified to pass upon the rela- tive importance of proposals that come before

it. X. COLLECTION OF AVAILABLE

MATERIAL

There is a vast amount of material that can

be used in the preparation of code requirements. The greater part of this consists of

reports of tests, proceedings of engineering

societies, and compilations of data of various

kinds. Some of this primary material is needed

for consultation, but in many cases the basic

facts have been assembled and evaluated by

competent bodies, so that the tedious ])rocess

of analyzuig a great mass of evidence can be

avoided. In cases where a doubt arises or where equally competen t bodies disagree, it may

be necessary to go back to the primary data

and reach an independent conclusion.

The National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D. C, and the American Standards

Association, 29 West Thirty-ninth Street, New

York, N. Y., are two principal sources of information when material for code use must be

accumulated. The Bureau ^vdll send on application, copies of its Letter Cu-cular 458, "Publications Relating to Building Regulation," in

which are listed its publications containing

building-code recommendations, and its Letter

135626°—39 2 [7]
Circular 290, "Publications of the National

Bureau of Standards Relating to Building

Materials, Building Standards, Home Building," in which are listed publications giving

results of tests and other information regarding

building materials and methods of construction.

The references given are confined to publications of this Bureau, which has long been interested in the development of unproved building

requirements. They include recommendations

prepared by the Department of Commerce

Building Code Committee, which functioned in

connection with the Bureau for a number of years. The publications themselves must be

ordered from the Superintendent of Documents,

Washington, D. C, in accordance with directions given.

The American Standards Association will supply on request copies of CB30, "Information on Sources of Material for Use in Preparing

and Revising Local Building Codes" and CB25,

"Building Code Arrangement." The first of

these is a carefully selected list of references,

including both governmental and nongovernmental publications. It is arranged according to principal topics foimd in a building code.

Directions for obtaining specific items, including addresses of publishing organizations and

prices, are given. The second is an approved

list of main headings for a building code,

together with suggested subheadings indicative

of the range of subject matter. From time to time specific reconunendations will also be

issued by sectional committees operating imder

the procedure of this Association. These will provide definite ways of dealing with a number

of matters for which examples drawn from exist- ing codes are given in this discussion by way of

illustration. Inquuy at the time a given local code is in process will disclose what recommendations are available.

A few well-selected building codes should

also be obtained, preferably from municipalities

of comparable size and geographical location.

These will provide a backgroimd of contemporary practice but should not necessarily be

regarded as models to be followed.

It will be found that, if a start is made along

the lines mentioned, one tiling will lead to another and that a comprehensive collection of

useful material will soon be estabhshed. This

can then be indexed and examined by the committee staff. Summary reports on principal

features can be prepared for the information of

the committee members.

XI. METHODS OF PREPARING CODE

There are several courses open in the preparation of requirements, each having certain advantages and disadvantages.

In former days the impulse has frequently

been followed to copy the code of another city,

perhaps with some minor alterations to bring

it into better conformity to local conditions.

Tills method is pleasant and easy. It is not

recommended, however, for several reasons. The code thus copied may contain errors which

will be perpetuated. The chances are that its supposed adaptability to the community con- cerned is more apparent than real. It has

been characterized as a dangerous procedure

which will very likely be regretted later on [9]. Even more undesirable is the practice of

combming requirements from various codes.

Unless done with the utmost care it is almost

certain to result in overlapping and duplication, sometimes of a ludicrous nature, and in

inconsistencies of policy.

Another method of approach is to utilize some one of the several recommended sets of

regulations that have been drawn up by organizations of fire underwriters or building officials,

making modifications to meet the local situation. For smaller mmiicipalities which are not

able to provide the necessary funds and per- sonnel for complete local action, tliis has a number of advantages. By utilizing this material, such municipahties are in a sense having

the services of the experienced talent which

prepared them and at little or no expense. All

the research and discussion necessary to reach

a balanced judgment have already been done.

As against tliis, however, the alert observer

will note that the model codes do not agree in a number of respects, raising the problem of

which is best for the particular conditions in

his own community.

The more generally favored way to go about

the work has been to build up a set of requirements, making use of all available material.

This requires organization of the committee so

[8]
that special subjects are assigned to subcommittees or individuals best qualified to deal

with them. It also means that arrangements

must be made for careful editing of the various

proposals that are brought in so that they

harmonize when put together.

Some of the labor of editing will be saved if agreement is reached at the outset on methods

of phraseology. For instance, the wording of

mandatory requirements, of exceptions, and of

variations from the general rule may be agreed

upon in advance. An approved method is as

follows: "General rules should be stated first, followed by any modifications to the general

rule which may be included. The words 'provided that' where only one modification occurs, followed by 'provided further' when there is more than one modification, should precede

such modifications. In a few instances it may

be found convenient, where there are exceptions to which a rule does not apply, to use a

clause starting with the word 'except' preceding the general rule." [19] The arrangement of tabular matter and

method of providing headings may be standardized. From all this will come a set of instructions which can be reduced to writing and dis- tributed to subcommittees working more or

less independently on their special problems.

XII. USE OF CONSULTANT

Selecting the right kind of znaterial and putting it in cohereni; form is not an easy matter.

The committee will very likely feel the need

for expert advice. It may also desire to be

relieved of much technical detail and thus have more time to devote to matters of general

policy. Employment of a consultant accomplishes these ends. The competent consultant is able to provide expert craftsmanship

in the wording of provisions, a viewpoint unaffected by local prejudices and rivalries, and

a specialized knowledge that enables him to distinguish between workable and unworkable

requirements. His experience in other cities makes it possible for him to anticipate many

of the questions that will inevitably arise and

to be ready with a reasonable solution which

conserves time and energy in the code-making

process.

XIII. CODE ARRANGEMENT

A great deal of thought has been devoted to the best way to arrange the numerous topics

customarily found in building codes. The

matter has been discussed at length in meetings

of building officials [20, 21] and has constituted the subject of a report issued by the

Department of Commerce Building Code Committee [9]. Wliile there are two contrasting

schools of thought, the methods sponsored by

them represent a considerable reduction from

the varieties of arrangement that were employed some years ago. Whether any fusion

of these two main systems is possible, or whether one will eventually crowd out the other

is not clear at the present time. There are obvious advantages in having all requirements

appear in the same places and with the same

general method of treatment in aU codes, but

for the present, it is only fair to record that

both methods have given satisfaction.

One method makes of the code a series of

miniature codes, each concerned with a particular occupancy. Thus, one chapter may deal

with dwellings, another with office buildings, a

third with factories, and so on. As far as

possible, everything pertaining to the particular

occupancy is given in the chapter so headed,

but as a practical matter certain other chapters

that apply to all occupancies must be added.

These include requirements for administration,

as well as engineering requirements relating to strength of materials which would, of course, not change with occupancy.

The other method lists main headings according to subject matter rather than by occupancies. The chapters deal with fu'e resistance,

exits, light and ventilation, and so on. It allows

for considerable compression since several

occupancies will frequently have the same re- quirements and it is not necessary to repeat

these requirements in successive chapters.

One universal method would be desirable but

is not yet here. There is greater agreement on

arrangement of main topics than on further

details. The Building Code Correlating Committee of the American Standards Association

and the Department of Commerce Building

Code Committee have approved substantially

the same main order [22, 9]. The following list
of chapters shows the main headings used

under this method, wliich is a sHght modification and condensation of tlie form sponsored by

tlie Department of Commerce Building Code

Committee, the changes appearing in the form

approved by the Building Code Correlating Committee of the American Standards Association.

1. Administration.

2. Definitions (including classifications).

3. General building restrictions.

4. Special occupancy requirements.

5. Light and ventilation.

6. Means of egress.

7. Loads.

8. Construction requirements.

9. Fire protection and fire resistance.

10. Chimneys and heating appliances.

11. Fire-extinguishing equipment.

12. Precautions during building operations.

13. Signs and billboards.

14. Electrical.

15. Elevators.

16. Plumbing.

By consulting the code recommended by the

Pacific Coast Building Officials Conference [23] and that recommended by the National Board

of Fire Underwriters [24], it will be possible to

see how more-or-less typical examples of the

two methods described appear in actual recom- mended requirements.

Wliichever method is chosen, arrangements

for a thorough alphabetical index and for adequate cross-referencing of sections requiring

such treatment will be of great assistance to the

user [9]. This is a detail too often neglected.

When properly done, it often goes far to remove

the difficulties resulting from illogical arrangement. The lack of a good index is responsible

for much difficulty in ascertaining what is actually required.

Closely linked with the problem of arrangement is that of numbering the articles and sections. The numbering system needs to be such

as to permit locating provisions readily and it should lend itself to insertion of new requirements without dislocating the system. A

decimal system was employed in the recom- mended arrangement issued by the Department

of Commerce Building Code Committee [9]. A

modification of tliis has been employed in the

code of New York City which went into effect on January 1, 1938. In tliis, each number to the right of a decimal point is a subdivision of

the item just to the left. For example, section

8.3.1.6 is the sixth item in the first subdivision

of the third section of article 8. As the numbers between decimal points may be increased

indefinitely, a great degree of flexibility is obtained. On the other hand, thesystem is some- what hard for the average person to grasp at first.

Examiple:

Article VIII Construction

Section 800 Workmanship

Section 801 Excavations

1. General

2. Support of neighboring buildings and struc- tures

(a) (b)

(c) The Building Code Correlating Committee of

the American Standards Association has ex- pressed preference for the second method as being somewhat more quickly understood by the

average reader.

In a number of municipalities, ordinances on

various subjects are brought together in a general code which has a nimibering system of its own. In such cases, the building code will naturally conform to the system chosen.

Example:

Article 8 Construction

8.1 Workmanship

8.1.1 Workmanship on Wood Frame Structures

8.1.2 Workmanship on Welded Structures

8.1.3 Storage of Concrete Materials

8.2 Excavations

8.2.1 Owner

8.2.2 Excavations Affecting Adjoining Property

8.2.2.1 Temporary Support of Adjoining

Property

Another system is to number major headings

consecutively from one up, main subdivisions

being assigned numbers in the hundreds having

the first digit the same as that of the major

heading, and further subdivision being cared

for: first, by increasing the numbers consecutively in the hundred series ; then, by a consecutive series of minor nmnbers; and, finally, by

consecutive letters. There are several variations, all employing the same general method.

XIV. PERFORMANCE BASIS

There are several ways of wording requirements. One is to state the exact materials

110]
that must be used for a given purpose, and fre- quently the exact sizes and other details. If these are used it is assumed that the desired

results will be obtained.

Example.—-All cast-iron, wrought-iroii, or rolled-steel columns, including the lugs and brackets on same, used

for vertical supports in the interior of any fireproof

building, or used to support any fireproof floor, shall bo

entirely protected with not less than 4 inches of hard- burned brickwork, terra cotta, concrete, or other fire- proof material, without any air space next to the metal,

securely applied .... [25] Another way is to state the desired results and leave the details out except as they may

be cited for illustrative purposes.

Example.—Iron or steel columns shall be protected

bj' material or assemblies having a fire-resistive rating

of 4 hours for class one, fireproof structures, and of 3 hours for class two, fire-protected structures (except that interior columns in class two, fire-protected struc- tures for residence purposes may have only 2-hour

protection). [26] The first way is clear and definite, but it makes no allowance for varying resistance of

protective materials. The second is clear and

definite so far as it goes but throws no light on what materials and thicknesses are acceptable. If accompanied, as it should be, by in- formation in an appendix to the code listing

what materials have passed the test, a complete

picture is obtained. The particular virtue of

this method is that new materials become available for use as soon as they have demonstrated

their value under test. With the first method

an amendment to the code may be necessary

to accomplish this purpose. There is a wellfounded principle that it is not reasonable to specify both the required result and the mamier

in which it should be accomplished. If the

latter is given, the result must be assumed while

if the former is given, freedom should be left to adopt any legitimate way of achieving it. [27] Building-code requirements are in a transitional stage today in which more and more

emphasis is being placed on performance as demonstrated under standard test. The general principle has been widely endorsed [9, 28,

29] and is findmg its way into many recent

codes. It is not feasible to word all requirements this way, for no standard test may have

been developed in some cases or the subject

matter may not lend itself readily to this treatment because there is no established practice

to which reference can be made. Nevertheless, it will be found profitable to subject each

proposed requirement to analysis to see whether

it can be so worded that the end is emphasized

and the means to the end offer as great a choice

as possible.

XV. USE OF STANDARDS

A large amount of work has been done over

a period of years on the development of standards. These standards apply to quality of materials, to methods of test, and in some cases to methods of assembly of materials and per- formance under conditions of use. They have

been developed by committees of national or- ganizations having much better facilities for gathermg and evaluatmg data than any local body can hope to possess. By utilizing them,

a local code committee can avail itself of the

great amount of painstaking work that has

been done elsewhere and can place its requirements on a footing with others that have made

use of the same material.

Liberal use of nationally developed standards

has been made in many recent building codes,

with the result that greater uniformity in re- quirements has followed. A notable example

is the code of Cincinnati, Ohio, where some 75

approved standardized regulations of national

technical organizations have been used as a

basis for the code [12]. Care should be taken

not to assume that the mere adoption of such

standards is all that is necessary, however. It has been pointed out that they may not always

be readily available or comprehensible to the

average buUder and that they may not be in as complete form as is necessary for local use [30]. It is necessary to select them with discrimination, make provision for their convenient use by

such devices as keeping copies in the mimicipal

office building and indicating how they may

be obtained for personal use, and to provide

such supplementary matter as may appear

desirable after careful study to make them

applicable to local conditions.

For quality of buUding materials, standards

are available from several sources. The American Society for Testing IVIaterials, 260 South

Broad Street, Philadelphia, Pa., is most promi-

[11]
nent among nongovernmental sources. It is a

nonprofit organization which issues standards

prepared by evenly balanced groups of producers, consumers, and general interests. It also issues "tentative standards," which are

felt to need a period of seasoning before they

acquire the status of a full standard. Both

types of standards are subject to periodical

review m the light of increased knowledge.

They are in constant use by purchasing agents,

specification writers, and others who order

building materials. They constitute a con- venient and accurate means of definitely identifying the materials which enter into construction. In some cases, it will be desirable to make use

of Federal specifications prepared by the

Federal Specifications Executive Committee.

These speciiications are prepared primarily for

the use of government purchasing agencies and

to some extent may reflect the special market

for which they are written. A list of these

specifications and copies of individual specifications may be purchased from the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C.

A series of "Commerical Standards" is issued

by the National Bureau of Standards. This

series includes a number of standards which are applicable to building construction and codes.

These standards are safeguarded by a procedure

conducted by the National Bureau of Standards

to protect all those directly concerned, are adjusted in public hearmgs, and issued only

after they are accepted in writing by a satis- factory majority of production volume, including distributors and consumer organizations.

A list of these standards may be obtained on

request from the National Bureau of Standards,

Waslungton, D. C.

Certain "Simplified Practice Recommendations" available from the same Bureau also have

a relation to building regulations, particularly

in the case of lumber, for which information on

basic grades and actual sizes as compared with

nominal sizes is given.

Standards of the American Standards Association, 29 West Thirty-nmth Street, New

York, N. Y., are also extremely useful in connection with buildmg-code work. For the most

part they are standards of practice, setting

forth approved conditions for such features of

building construction as exits, elevators, and

electrical work. They go into their special

subjects in considerable detail, with the result

that they are usually adopted as separate

documents with appropriate reference in the

building code or appear in shortened form in the

code with a reference to fuller details in the

standard. These standards are prepared by

representative committees under careful safe- guards that no one interest shall dominate the

requirements to the exclusion of fair treatment

for others affected. It is these precautions that

account for the confidence with which standards

of the American Standards Association are used by the public and the respect shown them

in the courts. Another group of standards is that prepared

by an organization dedicated to development

of improved uses of a particular material or by

an association of manufacturers interested in

seeing that their product is utilized to the best

advantage. Some of these bodies maintain

laboratories or contribute to support of research

work and all are continually making substantial

contributions to knowledge of budding materials. Extensive literature is available, and

standards and specifications are frequently proposed for consideration of code-making bodies.

Addresses of many of the associations from

whom material is available will be found in the

publication CB30, "Information on Sources of

Material for Use in Preparing and Revising Local Building Codes," issued by the American

Standards Association.

The problem of ascertaining whether materials actually delivered on the job conform to required standards is handled in different ways

in various communities. Sometimes grade

marks of manufacturing associations may be

demanded in the requirements. Local officials frequently demand that brand marks be applied to local products and check conformance

to quality by periodical inspection or test. In- formation on more extensive application of

methods of identification through labeling may

be obtained from the National Bureau of

Standards, Washington, D. C, and from the

Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., 207 East Ohio

Street, Chicago, 1)1. Having obtained copies of standards and satisfied itself of their usefulness, the local code

[12]
committee is confronted with the problem of

how to refer to them. It is obvious that to print them in their entirety in the code would

cause that document to assume huge proportions. Since it is impracticable to include

them verbatim, the question arises, what is a

legal way to make them appUcable. The pi'oblem has engaged the attention of a number of

writers who have discussed the difficulties in

various jurisdictions. Burton [3 1] has suggested a State enabling act authorizing adoption by

reference. Miller [29], Irwin [32], and the Committee on Legislation and Administration of the

President's Conference on Home Building and

Home Ownership [28] have suggested various

solutions. Moulton [33] has summarized the

various methods that have been employed and

has discussed the problem in detail. The surest way is to refer to the standar-l by

title, number, and year. This avoids the charge

that legislative authority is delegated to some

outside body.

Example.—Hollow clay tile used for exterior, party,

or bearing walls shall be of manufacture and quality at

least equal to the "medium class," as prescribed by the Standard Specifications and Tests for Structural Clay

Load Bearing Wall Tile (A. S. T. M. Designation C 34-

31) of the American Society for Testing Materials. Since standards are being constantly improved, however, and issued in new editions, a

large number of references in the code may

soon become obsolete, requiring frequent amendments to keep the code up to date. Attempts

have been made to meet this difficulty by

saying that the standard, as amended from

time to time, shall apply. This is a doubtful

expedient.

Another way is to state the fundamental

principles that apply and confer power on the

building official to make rules and regulations

carrying out the intent of the code. The

progressive and well-informed official will make

national standards the basis of such rulings, and

can recognize new editions without recourse to modifying the code itself. Example.—Quality of Materials. All building materials shall be of a qualitj' to meet the intent of this ordinance, and shall conform to such specifications, consistent with its requirements, as may be promulgated by the superintendent of buildings, or in the absence of such specifications, to well-recognized standards for the materials in question. [35]

A tliird method is to state fundamental

purposes and make the adoption of specified

standards prima facie evidence of safe practice.

This does not require confining the approved

standard to any particular edition.

In a few States, there is State legislation

empowering municipalities to adopt standards

or even complete code requirements directly by

reference, with suitable safeguards as to m;)ldng

the standards available in the municipal offices. Example.—An act relating to the passage of ordi- nances by cities or counties, and authorizing cities or counties to adopt ordinances relating to building construction, plumbing or electric wiring by reference to published codes on such subjects; provided not less than

three printed copies of such code or codes, in boolv form,

have been filed with the clerk. The People of the State of California do enact as

follows: Section 1. Ordinances passed by cities or counties must be posted or published in a newspaper as required by their respective charters or the general laws; provided that ordinances establishing rules and regulations for such matters as the construction of buildings

or the installation of plumbing or electric wiring, where

such rules and regulations have been published as a code in book form, may adopt such code or portion

thereof by reference thereto without further publication

or posting, provided not less than three (3) copies of such code have been filed for use and examination by

the public in the office of the clerk of such city or county,

as the case may be. [36] The choice of methods will be governed by

constitutional limitations and legal precedents

in the particular community concerned. In

general, it is well to explore the possibilities of

the second and tliird methods with the object

of applying one of them so that flexibility of

adjustment to changing conditions will be as- sured. If the legal obstacles are insurmountable, the first method is always available.

XVI. ACCEPTANCE OF NEW MATERIALS

AND METHODS

The rapid introduction of new materials and

methods of construction presents problems to every municipal buUding department. To a

considerable extent these problems will be anticipated through the use of the pei'formance

basis already mentioned. It is necessary to supplement this, however, by some provision

which will make it possible to pass upon the

new development without \mnecessary delay.

Various methods are in use, such as approval

[13]
by the buildmg official, approval by a local board, or submittal of an amendment to the

code.

Examples.—

(1) The Inspector of Buildings shall have full authority to approve or disapprove any device, material or construction proposed to be used in building construction in the city of Minneapolis, not specifically provided

for in this ordinance, and may base such approval or disapproval upon the results of satisfactory evidence of competent and impartial tests or investigations con- ducted by others, or upon the results of satisfactory

tests made under his direction. [37]

(2) For the purpose of securing for the public the

benefits of new developments in the building industry

with respect to construction, materials, processes and

methods and appliances to insure public safety, the Board may make or cause to be made at the expense

of the promoter or submitter, investigations of new

materials or modes of construction, intended for use

in the construction of buildings or structures in the

city of Wilmington which are not provided for in this ordinance and not prohibited thereby and shall adopt

and promulgate rules of practice and regulations setting forth the conditions under which such materials or modes of construction may be used. It shall have the power to make similar investigations at the expense of the promoter or submitter in cases where a recommendation to Council for amendment of this ordinance is contemplated. [38] Approval depends on appropriate tests or on

submittal of evidence that the innovation is in

accord with good engineering practice. The

approval is accompanied by prescribed conditions of use. In larger cities where it is possible

to organize a board, tliis provides a broader

base for judgment than the opinion of the building official. In either case difficulties wiU be

encountered in passing upon radically new

types of construction unless standard methods of

tests have been developed and facilities are available for having tests made. One of the

responsibilities of the local official or board will be to select approved laboratories where tests may be conducted at the expense of the manufacturer and whose reports may be accepted as disinterested and conclusive. The method of

acceptance by amendment to the code is a much slower process and may be subject to as much, if not more, danger of political or other

influence, than the method of acceptance by an

official or board.

This matter of giving adequate attention to new developments in the construction field has

been emphasized repeatedly in comments on

building codes [8, 28]. It is one matter deserving of special attention by a local committee.

XVII. RULES AND REGULATIONS

As already indicated, problems are continually cropping up concerning building regulation,

and it often happens that the code has no

answer for them. If the general principle

governing such cases is set forth in the code,

however, and power is granted in the code for some person or body to lay down specific

conditions which carry out the intent of the

code, an awkward situation can be bridged.

It would be pleasant if the building official could turn always to a particular page of the

code and cite a passage applying exactly to what is proposed. Experience has demonstrated that to expect a code to fulfill this fimction is a vain hope.

Frequently an interpretation by the building

official will meet the situation. Authorities

differ on how far this interpretive power should

be exercised by the official, and its existence is sometimes based on inference rather than on

any specific provision of the code. In other

cases, the power is expressly conferred.

Example.—Said Building Commissioner shall have

full power to interpret any question arising under the

provisions of this ordinance relative to the manner of construction or material to be used in the erection, alteration or repair of any building. [39] As has been indicated, opinion is not unani- mous on granting discretion to the building official in the matter of making rules and regulations.

The case for it has been ably presented [40, 8,

9] and effective arguments against it or cautions

as to restrictions on its use have also been made

[16, 41]. There appears to be a trend toward

its use, however, in recognition of the many

complications that develop in adrm'nistering a

code. Perhaps as fair a statement of the

reasoning back of this trend as can be made

would be as follows: When matters come up

which are plamly new and for which no definite

guiding principle is laid down in the code, then an amendment is required; when, however,

something comes up which is not exactly covered but which is plainly related to some definite

principle already set forth, a ruling by the

building official or by a designated board will accomplish the purposes of the code. By
granting specific power to make rulings which

merely carry out the intent of the code and

do not seek to create new requirements or

strained interpretations, a useful administrative

process is set up.

Example.—The Board shall have power to adopt

rules to secure the intent and purposes of this Code and

a proper enforcement of its provisions. The Board

shall also have power to make rules and regulations

respecting the approval of materials and methods of construction. [42] Rules serve several useful purposes. They

provide the machinery for acceptance of new

materials, they facilitate the early acceptance

of standards, and they permit a limited amount

of variation from the strict letter of the requirements in imusual cases.

It is of course possible for such a power to lead to abuses, and it is for tliis reason that it

is often qualified in various ways.

Example.—The Commissioner of Buildings may

from time to time adopt rules which, when approved

by Council, shall have the force and effect of ordinances. Until other rules shall have been adopted and approved

by Council, the recommended provisions of the various approved technical organizations with exceptions and

additions as hereinafter specified in this Code, shall be

considered as the rules applicable and shall have the

force and effect of ordinances, except wherein such

rules are not in conformity with other provisions of

this Code. The Commissioner of Buildings shall keep

at least two copies of aU such rules in his office for public reference. [43] Example.-—No rule of the superintendent of buildings

shall become effective until two weeks after notice of intention to adopt it shall have been given in the official newspaper and until a public hearing on the same shall have been held. Such rule must be drawn in its pro- posed form and open to public inspection at the time

the notice to adopt is published. Rules adopted and

promulgated as herein provided shall have the same

force and effect as provisions of this ordinance. [44] The importance of providing adequate safe- guards against arbitrary action have been

repeatedly emphasized [40, 29, 16]. Publicity

occupies a prominent place, involving such

steps as notice of intention to act, public hearings, and making generally available the rule as adopted.

XVIII. PROVISIONS FOR CHANGES

IN CODE

Even the most flexible of requirements do

not escape the necessity of an occasional overhauling to bring them fully abreast of the times.

Circumstances arise which were not thought of at the time the code was written and for which

no adequate treatment can be accorded except

through revision or amendment to the code.

Because of inertia, the tendency will be to delay meeting the situation squarely unless

there is some definite system set up in the code

for its amendment and revision. A method

sometimes employed is to write into the code

a provision placing upon the building official or board the responsibility for periodical reports

to the local legislative body on desirable changes.

This may form a part of the customary annual

reports or may be a separate feature.

Example.—The Board shall also act in an advisory

capacity to the Building Inspector and his assistants and to the Council and shall, from time to time, recom- mend to the Council such amendments of and additions

to this ordinance as it may deem advisable. It shall have power to conduct hearings with respect to pro- posed amendments of this ordinance before recom- mending the same to the Council. [45] The point is that unless some agency is charged

with the duty of reporting in this connection,

the matter is likely to be put off far beyond

the time when action should have been taken.

XIX. ENFORCEMENT

Careful work in preparation of technical re- quirements may lose much of its eftectiveness

if subsequent enforcement is weak. To ensure

that the code will be intelligently and impartially applied, requirements frequently call for

definite qualifications for the building official,

such as 5 years' experience as an architect,

engineer, or builder. Sometimes city charter

provisions have a bearing. Advice should be

sought on what can legally be written into the

code on this matter.

A man of the requisite experience and character to administer the code deserves protection

from pressure that will inevitably arise to make

exceptions and grant favors. A civil service

system based on merit has been proposed as the

most effective way to assure unpartial administration [46]. Certainly, the protection of the

public should ofter a career of dignity and per- manence that will attract capable men. Where

the merit system does not apply, or cannot be

introduced, provision for appointment for a

[15]
definite period, such as 5 years, with removal

only for cause after a public hearing, may meet

the situation.

In small municipalities, the budget may not

be sufficient to attract applicants for the position and the volume of building may be insuffi- cient to occupy the entire time of an official. In such cases, it may be better to retain the

qualffications mentioned and make arrangements with adjoining municipalities to pool

resources with the object of obtaining a good

man who can serve all [47]. Some codes also make provision for making use of consulting

service in the case of unusual situations.

Example.—The Commissioner shall have the power

to engage such expert ojiiinion as he may deem neces- sary to pass upon unusual technical issues which may

arise, subject to the approval of the Common Council.

[481The technique of enforcement has been dis- cussed in various papers [49, 50, 47] and need

not be enlarged upon here. It is pertinent to remark, however, that a good code deserves

good administration and that good administration deserves the moral and financial support

of the community. It is a mistake to regard

the office of budding official as of minor miportance. Considering the features of safety

and health involved and the volume of construction that goes on each year, the office is one

of great responsibility. That officials are conscious of this is evidenced by the fact that

they have organized professional bodies whose

meetings are devoted to serious consideration of administrative problems [51]. Recognition of

the importance of the job and of the high

cahber of men necessary to enforce requirements adequately and impartiaUy wUl be forced

upon the attention of any committee which has

to consider the many technical matters that

enter into a building code.

XX. BOARD OF APPEAL

Reference has been made at several points to a board which might exercise certaia powers.

This is a device which helps to make admmistration of the code effective by providing a

place to which a person aggrieved by the buildmg official's decision may go and state his case without the necessity of slow and expensive

court action. In larger cities, it is common to have such a body. It may be assigned various

duties, among which are consideration of applications for variances from the strict terms of the

code, if this is authorized by law, and appeals

from the building official's interpretations or

rulings. Other activities which have been

mentioned include passing upon the merits of new materials and making recommendations for

amendments to the code. While it may not

be considered feasible to establish such a board

in small communities, the possibUity of creat- ing it should always be considered, for it constitutes a protection against arbitrary action of

the local official and provides an orderly way

of adjusting the code to new developments.

Example.—^Whenever the Building Inspector shall reject or refuse to approve the mode or manner of construction proposed to be followed or materials to be

used in the erection or alteration of any such building

or structure, or when it is claimed that the provisions

of this Code or any of the ordinances relating thereto do not apply, or that an equally good or more desirable form of construction can be employed in any

specific case, or when it is claimed that the true intent and meaning of this Code or any of the ordinances and

regulations have been misconstrued or wrongly inter- preted, the permit applied for having been refused by

the Building Inspector, and the owner of such building

or structure, or his duly authorized agent, may appeal

from the decision of the Building Inspector, in writing, to the Board of Appeal. The Board shall, after hearing

the evidence on such appeal, either afflrm, modify or reverse the decision of the Building Inspector as to it may seem best under all the circumstances of the case, and their decision shall have the same effect as if it were

the decision of the Building Iiaspector. [52]

XXI. APPENDIX

No matter how well the code is written, there

will always be questions about its provisions

wliich can be cleared up to a considerable extent by accompanying explanations and illustrations. These cannot be a part of the legal requirements

but they may be offered in an appendix consisting of numbered sections adequately cross- referenced to the corresponding provisions in

the code itself. Such appendix matter may

consist of brief comment on the reason for the

particular provisions concerned, references to

test data, examples of how the provisions work

out in typical cases, and diagrams showing

approved practice. Wliile this adds to the bulk

[16]
of the code, it is so useful a method of obtaining

compliance tlirough better understanding of re- quirements that it justifies the additional effort necessary to supply it.

XXII. CONCLUSION

Tliis discussion has touched upon certain

aspects of building regulation that are of

interest to local committees charged with the

responsibihty of writing buUding codes. An

effort has been made to provide further information tlirough selected references to articles by persons who have devoted serious study to the subject. It will be apparent from what

has been said and from collateral reading that

building codes are founded partly upon fact

and partly upon opinion. For facts, it is possible to turn to records of laboratory tests and

of experience with fires and structural failures. For opinion, it is necessary to resort to study

of views expressed by experts whose background

qualifies them to speak with authority; such

opinion is hkely to be better balanced when

expressed through the composite judgment of committees.

Present-day buildmg-code committees have

the advantage of a great volume of test data,

the proceedings of professional and scientific societies and of buildmg officials, as well as recommendations of standardization bodies

and national or regional committees. Use of

such material in an orderly way is of greater

benefit to a community than sporadic campaigns to alter existing requirements under the

cloud of some great catastrophe or in response

to dissatisfaction with some isolated requirement that is felt to be out of step with the times.

An attempt has been made here to indicate the

nature of this material and how it may be

organized to serve a useful purpose. The treat- ment has not been exhaustive, for there are other points deserving of consideration. Nevertheless, it is hoped that sufficient information

has been presented to enable a local code committee to get its bearings and proceed with

confidence in its work.

XXIII. SELECTED REFERENCES

[1] R. F. Harper, The Code of Hammurabi, (University of Chicago Press, 1904).

[2] F. Burton, History of Building Codes, Proc. 15th Annual Meeting of the Building Officials Conference of America, 1929, p. 40 (1929).

[3] Fitz-Elwyne's Assize of Buildings—I Richard I (1189) (The pioneer building ordinance). An

introduction by C. W . Tooke, Supplement to the Nat. Munic. Rev. 17, 55.5-.563 (September 1928).

[4] Ford, Morrow, and Thompson, Slums and Housing 1, ch. 2. (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1932).

[5] Report of the Select Committee on Reconstruction and Production, United States Senate. Senate Report 829, 66th Cong. 3d Sess. (1921).

[6] Official Building Code of the city of Detroit, sec. 102 (1936).

[7] Status of Municipal Building Codes, NBS Letter

Circular 377 (1935) . Mimeographed.

[8] R. P. Miller, Economic Housing as Affected by

Building Codes. Appendix C to Report of Committee on Construction, President's Conference on Home Building and Home Ownership (1931). Mimeographed.

[9] Recommended Practice for Arrangement of Building Codes, BS BH8 (1925). Out of print.

[10] Wisconsin State Building Code, ch. 1, sec. 3 (1934).

[11] Revised Building Code of the city of Wauwatosa,

Wis., sec. 3.03 (1930).

[12] C. M. Stegner, The respojisihility for obsolete building codes, Building Standards Monthly 7, 6 (February 1938).

[13] C. M. Stegner, Police power for building code en- forcement, Building Standards Monthlj' 7, 18 (October 1938)

[14] A Standard Schedule for Grading Cities and Towns

of the United States with Reference to Their

Fire Defenses and Physical Condition. Pre- pared by the Fire Prevention and Engineering

Standards Committee of the National Board of Fire Underwriters.

[15] D. H. Merrill, The effect of building code adoption on fire insurance rates, Building Standards

Monthly 7, 11 (February 1938).

[16] F. Burton, Some Legal Aspects of Building Codes

and Their Enforcement, Proc. 10th Annual

Meeting of the Building Officials Conference,

1924, p. 95 (1924).

ri7] Information on Sources of Material for L^se in Pre- paring and Revising Local Building Codes. Compiled by the Building Code Correlating

Committee of the American Standards Association in cooperation with the National Bureau of Standards. CB30 (1937). Mimeographed.

[18] L. B. Upson, Drafting and enforcing a building code. Am. City Mag. 35, 685 (November 1926).

[19] The Preparation of Minimum Building Require- ments—General Suggestions for the Guidance

of Sectional Committees. American Standards

Association, New York, N. Y., CB26 (1937). Mimeographed.

[17]
[20] C. M. Stegner, Recommended Practice for Ar- rangement of Building Codes, Proc. 16th Annual

Meeting of the Building Officials Conference of America, 1930, p. 139 (1930).

[21] F. Burton, The Arrangement of a Building Code,

Proc. 9th Annual Meeting of the Buildmg Officials Conference, 1923, p. 31 (1923).

[22] Building Code Arrangement, Am. Standards

Assn., New York, N. Y., CB25 (1937). Mimeographed.

[23] Uniform Building Code, Pacific Coast Building

Officials Conference, Los Angeles, Calif. (1937).

[24] Building Code Recommended by the National

Board of Fire Underwriters, National Board of Fire Underwriters, New York, N. Y. (1934).

[25] Building Code and Housing Laws of the city of Memphis, Tenn., sec. 145 (1930).

[26] The Building Code of the city of New York, sec. 10.2.1 (1938).

[27] Recommended Minimum Requirements for Plumbing, p. 10. BS BH13 (1932).

[28] Report of the Correlating Committee on Legisla- tion and Administration. President's Conference on Home Building and Home Ownership 11, 101 (1932).

[29] R. P. Miller, The standardizing of building codes, Architectural Forum, p. 147 (January 1928).

[30] H. E. Plummer, Revision of building codes, Building

Standards Monthly 7, 12 (May 1938).

[31] F. Burton, An Enabling Act to Permit the Adoption of National Standards, Proc. 16th Annual

Meeting of the Building Officials Conference of America, 1930, p. 47 (1930).

[32] A. N. Irwin, Validity of an ordinance adopting a document by reference. Building Standards

Monthly 7, 11 (July 1938).

[33] R. S. Moulton, The adoption of N. F. P. A. stand- ards in law, Quart. Nat. Fire Protect. Assn. 30, 217 (January 1937).

[34] Building Code of the city of Lexington, Ky., sec. 816(a) (1935).

[35] Building Code of the city of Rochester, N. Y.,

sec. 700 (1935).

[36] State of California, Stat. 1927; Ch. 190, p. 347.

[37] Building Code and Certain Special Ordinances,

Minneapolis, Minn., sec. 108.5 (1935).

[38] The Building Code of the city of Wilmington,

Del., sec. 101-8(d) (1936).

[39] Bviilding Code and Housing Laws of the city of Memphis, Tenn., sec. 3 (c) (1930).

[40] R. P. Miller, The Fundamentals of a Building

Code, Proc. 15th Annual Meeting of the Building Officials Conference of America, 1929, p. 48

(1929).

[41] J. G. Houghton, Proc. 15th Annual Meeting of the Building Officials Conference of America, 1929,

p. 52 (1929).

[42] The Building Code of the city of New York, sec. 2.2.1.1 (1938).

[43] Building Code of the city of Cincinnati, sec. 1109

(1933).

[44] Building Code of the city of Rochester, N. Y., sec. 2-3c (1935).

[45] The Building Code of the city of Wilmington, Del.,

sec. 101-8 (c) (1936).

[46] J. J. Backus, Civil Service for Building Officials, Proc. 15th Annual Meeting of the Building

Officials Conference of America, 1929, p. 32

(1929).

[47] H. W. Rieschl, A Municipal Building Regulation

Department. Prepared under the auspices of the League of Wisconsin Municipalities (1936). Mimeographed.

[48] Official Building Code of the city of Detroit, sec. Ill (1936).

[49] H. E. Plummer, Efficiency in a Building Department, Proc. 10th Annual Meeting of the Building

Officials Conference, 1924, p. 59 (1924).

[50] J. W. Oehmann, Administrative Technique—Building Codes. Appendix II to Report of the Correlating Committee on Legislation and Administration. President's Conference on Home

Building and Home Ownership (1931). Mimeographed.

[51] E. W. Roemer, Responsibility and Liability of Building Officials. In The Technical Tome

1937. 22d Annual Convention Building Offi- cials Conference of America, p. 7 (1937).

[52] The Building Code of the city of Richmond, Va.,

sec. 8 (1934).

Washington, December 28, 1938.

[IS]
BUILDING MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES REPORTS

The following publications in this series are now available by purchase from

the Superintendent of Documents at the prices indicated (see page II of cover):

BMSl Research on Building Materials and Structures for Use in Low-Cost Housing- 10^ BMS2 Methods of Determining the Structural Properties of Low-Cost House Constructions 10(4 BMS3 Suitability of Fiber Insulating Lath as a Plaster Base 10^ BMS4 Accelerated Aging of Fiber Building Boards 10(J BMS5 Structural Properties of Six Masonry Wall Constructions 15^ BMS6 Survey of Roofing Materials in the Southeastern States 15(i BMS7 Water Permeability of Masonry Walls 10^ BMS8 Methods of Investigation of Surface Treatment for Corrosion Protection of

Steel 10#

BMS9 Structural Properties of the Insulated Steel Construction Company's "Frameless-Steel" Constructions for Walls, Partitions, Floors, and Roofs 10^ BMSlO Structural Properties of One of the "Keystone Beam Steel Floor" Constructions Sponsored by the H. H. Robertson Company 10^ BMSll Structural Properties of the Curren Fabrihome Corporation's "Fabrihome"

Constructions for Walls and Partitions 10j5 BMS12 Structural Properties of "Steelox" Constructions for Walls, Partitions,

Floors, and Roofs Sponsored by Steel Buildings, Inc 15^ BMS13 Properties of Some Fiber Building Boards of Current Manufacture lOji BMS14 Indentation and Recovery of Low-Cost Floor Coverings 10^ BMS15 Structural Properties of "Wheeling Long-Span Steel Floor" Construction

Sponsored by Wheeling Corrugating Company 10^ BMS16 Structural Properties of a "Tilecrete" Floor Construction Sponsored by

Tilecrete Floors, Inc 10^ BMS17 Sound Insulation of Wall and Floor Constructions lOjJ