The Tyranny of "Code"

I can't count the number of times well meaning people have said to me "You can't do that, it's not up to code". Followed by "you'll never be able to sell it". It's enough to make my blood boil.

Don't get me wrong -- I love the fact that modern houses just about cannot be lit on fire because building code prevents them from doing so. I like having air for my furnace and a ground wire for my electricity. But I have three points to make:

First of all I have lived in several modern (1970+) houses in my small town NONE of which were up to code in every aspect. Even the code of their day. I bought and sold a house (built by a licenced contractor) which had several aspects that were not to code -- I disclosed this when I sold it -- it had no effect on the sale. In a busy market you could sell a house with no roof (I exaggerate). In a slow market a buyer could make you replace code with non-code (OK, I'm really exaggerating). But the point is, most houses don't conform to code in some ways and it has no effect on sales.

Secondly, code must be applied intelligently. The GOAL of code is to make a house safer. If applying a code doesn't make a house safer, or worse yet, makes it less safe (or less structurally sound) then it is a bad idea.

Third, code wasn't developed for old houses or adobe houses. For one thing, nothing but the roof on an adobe house is actually flammable. Code has a lot to say about keeping water away from walls and floors of a house -- but an old adobe house "brought to code" can be ruined by water now trapped around adobe walls, instead of evaporating. Concrete floors poured inside adobe walls, concrete berms on the outside, water barriers and waterproof flooring are all done in the name of bringing a house to "code", but they can bring a house down. A house, which has already survived it's first 150 years!

Finally, everyone should know that historic houses aren't legally required to follow the code your local new subdevelopment requires. In New Mexico the code that should be followed is the 2006 NEW MEXICO HISTORIC EARTHEN BUILDINGS. This says in particular "Replacement of existing or missing features using original materials shall be permitted. Partial replacement for repairs that match the original in configuration, height, and size shall be permitted. Such replacements shall not be required to meet the materials and methods requirements for new construction".

(Oddly enough many of the NM state building codes are modifications of the international building codes...which you cannot get online. See the article.)

The National Trust for Historic Preservation cites this as a major problem renovating old school buildings: "Most existing and recently built school buildings will not comply with every code provision at the local and state levels. Despite the flexibility of many codes and the potential for waivers, often studies rigidly interpret this compliance, declaring a building unsafe or cost prohibitive to retrofit. " Later in the same document they point out "the [historic] designation could make the project eligible for alternative building code requirements and additional funding sources".