are there any professional practitioners that are studying for PDD that can comment on this section of the "Objectives"? this question came up in 4.0 and i have an opinion but more importantly i don't understand what this section is indicating i need to study:
"2.3 integrate multiple codes to a project design
- multiple codes may govern a project, depending on the jurisdiction, funding stream, or other factors. you will need to understand the use of related codes, like energy, mechanical, and universal design; determine how multiple codes are used together; and discern which code governs when a conflict arises."
first off, what are you supposed to do if an energy code conflicts with the building code or which governs? is there some kind of hierarchy that i am unaware of? is there something specific WITHIN ICC that clears this up? what if an ICC code conflicts with another code that is used in that jurisdication.
ADA seems particularly gnarly and in the weeds and ill-suited to testing in PPD but they specifically mention "Universal Design" here. i know universal design is shown in AHPP but is this an actual part of IBC? if so, what is implied by including this reference? are they specifically excluding ADA here? no one is going to be able to parse the relationship between ADA and IBC here, are they?
secondly, what are your opinions on the following (as a hypothetical example) and why:
local zoning code states that you have a max height limit of some amount that is LOWER than IBC code adopted in that jurisdiction? or, conversely, local zoning code states that you have a max height HIGHER than the IBC code adopted for that jurisdiction. which governs?
my opinion is that the local jurisdiction governs in all cases since the local jurisdiction is the one that adopts the IBC and the local jurisdiction can amend IBC (in any way AFAIK) to suit local circumstances. on other forums the opinion appears to be whichever is most restrictive. this answer sounds convenient (and it may be correct in the exam for all i know) but is seems wrong to me as a point of fact.
thoughts from practicing professionals? any citations? what about 2.3 as listed above? what do i need to know or what do i need to read?
Please sign in to leave a comment.