Hi Folks. I'm struggling to decide whether to drop $1K on the complete NC digital code bundle package offered through ICC. I've been using the free interface for years and I'm not sure if the extra interactivity of the subscription is worth it.
Any advice based on your experience with the interface?
Thank you! It's a lot of $$ !
Jovan Millet
Aug 19, 22 6:32 pm
I've personally found UpCodes to be extremely valuable for looking through my state building codes easily, for free, and with the knowledge that the codes are always the most up to date. They also have a subscription service that includes comprehensive code search, calculation, and access to illustrations and diagrams, which costs $33 a month (vs. ICC, which costs $88 a month). I'd only consider ICC if I headed up a large office doing work in tons of different complex occupancy types throughout the nation. For me, I do custom residential in Southwest Florida, so my free access to UpCodes works just fine.
deltar
Aug 19, 22 7:11 pm
The above comment reads a lot like an ad, but I will second UpCodes. I have a physical copy of my building code and unless I'm going over code with someone I just default to the online version. It is passable without the additional features if you have your nose in the code enough to generally know the answer before you start.
ivanmillya
Aug 19, 22 8:21 pm
Haha yeah I guess it did sound like an ad read. I just got done showing a coworker today how to use UpCodes, because they were pouring through the basic version of ICC's online codes and having trouble finding the snippet they needed.
SneakyPete
Aug 19, 22 9:07 pm
I wish I had access to the commentary. It's the only thing I'd consider paying the theives at ICC for.
ivanmillya
Aug 20, 22 4:30 pm
I've always wondered though... even if you could use the commentary to argue to your building department that your interpretation of a code is correct, wouldn't it still ultimately be up to the individual department's interpretation? I've never particularly understood the code commentary... but then again, the sector I'm in is pretty tightly understood without needing to pour through code books.
Janosh
Aug 20, 22 4:54 pm
The IBC and IRC are model codes, and ultimately just suggestions that are adopted by local authorities. Local jurisdictions have total authority both over changing the written provisions as well how those provisions are interpreted.
SneakyPete
Aug 20, 22 5:21 pm
The commentary gives me insight into how the code is intended to be used and interpreted. The AHJ having the final say is a fact we must live with. The commentary allows me to make decisions earlier and faster because I know the intent. What some disgruntled asshole at the plancheck department decides isn't worth worrying about until the decision is made.
deltar
Aug 22, 22 12:16 pm
At this point in my career I AM the disgruntled asshole at the plan check department. That being said, if an Architect or Engineer brings me something I very rarely ask for corrections. In 99.9999% of cases I will just add notes and approve. That way the contractor can't say "you never told me." When I kick something entirely back it is because there is legitimately missing information in calculations or violates zoning/setbacks. I hate the type that gets so spun up in the perceived power.
SneakyPete
Aug 22, 22 12:19 pm
Sorry deltar, my personal biases should be a little less weaponized.
deltar
Aug 22, 22 12:32 pm
Hey man, bias away. My end goal is licensure not perpetually reviewing home owner drawn napkin plans.
proto
Aug 22, 22 1:18 pm
stick around deltar, we need some AHJ perspective in here every now and then
SneakyPete
Aug 22, 22 3:25 pm
Totally agree.
designstudio1
Jun 12, 24 4:15 pm
A plan reviewer cannot add comments to an engineered drawing as that is a criminal offense of practicing engineering without a license. Even if they add their comments to a non-engineered plan they can get sued.
Non Sequitur
Jun 12, 24 5:24 pm
Who pissed in your corn flakes this morning? Why so salty?
designstudio1
Jun 12, 24 4:16 pm
Yes the commentary is needed to understand exactly what the committees were getting at when they wrote the code. The illustrations are very important.
Hi Folks. I'm struggling to decide whether to drop $1K on the complete NC digital code bundle package offered through ICC. I've been using the free interface for years and I'm not sure if the extra interactivity of the subscription is worth it.
Any advice based on your experience with the interface?
Thank you! It's a lot of $$ !
I've personally found UpCodes to be extremely valuable for looking through my state building codes easily, for free, and with the knowledge that the codes are always the most up to date. They also have a subscription service that includes comprehensive code search, calculation, and access to illustrations and diagrams, which costs $33 a month (vs. ICC, which costs $88 a month). I'd only consider ICC if I headed up a large office doing work in tons of different complex occupancy types throughout the nation. For me, I do custom residential in Southwest Florida, so my free access to UpCodes works just fine.
The above comment reads a lot like an ad, but I will second UpCodes. I have a physical copy of my building code and unless I'm going over code with someone I just default to the online version. It is passable without the additional features if you have your nose in the code enough to generally know the answer before you start.
Haha yeah I guess it did sound like an ad read. I just got done showing a coworker today how to use UpCodes, because they were pouring through the basic version of ICC's online codes and having trouble finding the snippet they needed.
I wish I had access to the commentary. It's the only thing I'd consider paying the theives at ICC for.
I've always wondered though... even if you could use the commentary to argue to your building department that your interpretation of a code is correct, wouldn't it still ultimately be up to the individual department's interpretation? I've never particularly understood the code commentary... but then again, the sector I'm in is pretty tightly understood without needing to pour through code books.
The IBC and IRC are model codes, and ultimately just suggestions that are adopted by local authorities. Local jurisdictions have total authority both over changing the written provisions as well how those provisions are interpreted.
The commentary gives me insight into how the code is intended to be used and interpreted. The AHJ having the final say is a fact we must live with. The commentary allows me to make decisions earlier and faster because I know the intent. What some disgruntled asshole at the plancheck department decides isn't worth worrying about until the decision is made.
At this point in my career I AM the disgruntled asshole at the plan check department. That being said, if an Architect or Engineer brings me something I very rarely ask for corrections. In 99.9999% of cases I will just add notes and approve. That way the contractor can't say "you never told me." When I kick something entirely back it is because there is legitimately missing information in calculations or violates zoning/setbacks. I hate the type that gets so spun up in the perceived power.
Sorry deltar, my personal biases should be a little less weaponized.
Hey man, bias away. My end goal is licensure not perpetually reviewing home owner drawn napkin plans.
stick around deltar, we need some AHJ perspective in here every now and then
Totally agree.
A plan reviewer cannot add comments to an engineered drawing as that is a criminal offense of practicing engineering without a license. Even if they add their comments to a non-engineered plan they can get sued.
Who pissed in your corn flakes this morning? Why so salty?
Yes the commentary is needed to understand exactly what the committees were getting at when they wrote the code. The illustrations are very important.