THIS IS AN ARCHIVE OF LAKE TAHOE NEWS, WHICH WAS OPERATIONAL FROM 2009-2018. IT IS FREELY AVAILABLE FOR RESEARCH. THE WEBSITE IS NO LONGER UPDATED WITH NEW ARTICLES.

Meeting to highlight building code changes


image_pdfimage_print

With the new building season coming up, there are things every contractor, designer and homeowner should know before they start any project.

South Lake Tahoe officials are putting on a free seminar to enlighten people.

Topics will include: 

· Radon requirements will be mandatory.

· Sprinklers for additions could be required.

· Take into account in updating all plumbing fixtures when you improve anything in your house.

· Smoke detectors older than 10 years will need to be replaced whenever you pull a permit.

· Recycling documentation for all construction waste is required on all projects.

· When are building permits required?

The meeting is March 11 from 5-7pm at Lake Tahoe Airport.

image_pdfimage_print

About author

This article was written by admin

Comments

Comments (5)
  1. Perry R. Obray says - Posted: February 21, 2015

    “Radon requirements will be mandatory”
    Wonder if this is applied to all resales and rentals too.

    Great to see the city making things safer.

  2. Atomic says - Posted: February 22, 2015

    Sprinklers for additions……give me a break. Sprinklers in residential homes is a racket. This issue should remain between me and my insurance company. I’d like to see the study that shows the benefit of sprinklers, especially in additions built to code. I’m quite sure it is negligible. Where did all this nonsense about sprinklers come from? It needs to end.

    What’s next, the police will tell me that my dead bolt is not up to code, my exterior lighting is insufficient?

  3. Atomic says - Posted: February 22, 2015

    Thx Moral, I took a look at that link and read it carefully. I’ll provide support for my argument with this paragraph near the end of the study:

    An individual homeowner trying to use SPUD could struggle with specifying the value of a statistical life input if not familiar with the concept. A possible approach would be to look at the probabilities of fire and fatality, run SPUD with trial inputs and see where the resulting present value of fatalities averted matches the owner’s willingness to pay to avoid the probabilities.

    Ok, so after all the effort in the study, the safety concept of sprinklers is complex, yet in the end is an equation with many variables that may or may not convince a homeowner to install sprinklers. So here we have public agencies determining for me what they deem an acceptable risk for every household. Is it worth the cost to save a life? Certainly. Is everyone running out to install sprinklers without being forced to? No.

    Perhaps the building department should provide a number of studies to the the permitting public for their review. Some may choose sprinklers. The majority will not.

    Firefighters I personlly know admit candidly that sprinklers are not the first line of defense for a homeowners safety. Properly functioning and correctly placed smoke detectors are statistically the best and most cost effective solution for this problem. I have 4 in my house.

    This needs to stay a homeowner decision worked out with their insurance company.

    I also have an ongoing Radon detector monitoring my home. Luckily, I was able to get my numbers down with simply ventilating my crawl space. In New Hampshire, the Granite State, you cannot buy or sell a home without a Radon test…….seems more appropriate to me than forcing sprinklers down our throats….Radon is random, you simply cannot know if you have a problem without a test.

  4. sunriser2 says - Posted: February 24, 2015

    If the sprinkler systems are so great can we reduce the number of Firefighters?