Failed Building Inspection on Set

Oh thats just cruel. And besides, everyone knows Square is where its at.

Oh God I hate square heads!! They strip way to easy for people that don't understand how to size screw to bits! As well as the bits just not being nearly as common as star (easy to get a close size and will work mostly, but still strip quickly then) or phillips. Personally I try to use #2 phillips heads as much as possible just because almost everyone has the correct size bit in their kit somewhere.
 
I'm researching this because of several recent inquiries about the issue, but do not assume that because a building permit is not required that the building official does not have jurisdiction nor that the building codes do not apply. From the 2012 IBC:
105.2 Work exempt from permit.
Exemptions from permit requirements of this code shall not be deemed to grant authorization for any work to be done in any manner in violation of the provisions of this code or any other laws or ordinances of this jurisdiction. Permits shall not be required for the following:

Building:

8. Temporary motion picture, television and theater stage sets and scenery.
108.4 Termination of approval.
The building official is authorized to terminate such permit for a temporary structure or use and to order the temporary structure or use to be discontinued.

My interpretation is that 108.4 is referring to temporary structures that require pulling a permit, whereas theatrical sets are specifically exempted. Obviously, fire codes, means of egress -- those things still apply but would be enforced by the fire inspector instead of the building inspector.

We received some additional suggested arguments from a third-party through one of the VP's of USITT:
+ Scenery is temporary, and may be able to be defined as "sculpture"
+ We are not constructing buildings, we are creating an artistic product.
+ UBC does not address art or art installations.
+ UBC assumes public access by untrained personnel to structures it regulates. Theatrical sets are the exact opposite: not open to the public, and all cast and crew are trained on how to safely navigate the stage area.
 
My interpretation is that 108.4 is referring to temporary structures that require pulling a permit, whereas theatrical sets are specifically exempted. Obviously, fire codes, means of egress -- those things still apply but would be enforced by the fire inspector instead of the building inspector.

We received some additional suggested arguments from a third-party through one of the VP's of USITT:
+ Scenery is temporary, and may be able to be defined as "sculpture"
+ We are not constructing buildings, we are creating an artistic product.
+ UBC does not address art or art installations.
+ UBC assumes public access by untrained personnel to structures it regulates. Theatrical sets are the exact opposite: not open to the public, and all cast and crew are trained on how to safely navigate the stage area.

You are possibly correct regarding 108.4 and I will ask that specifically. In having worked closely with the ICC and the legacy predecessors BOCAI, ICBO (who published the UBC), and SBCCI very closely since the late 1980s. I'm pretty sure that even those things exempt from permit are required to comply with the building code and that the building official has jurisdiction if its in there jurisdiction.

A few comments on your defenses:

Buildings vs art - they are wise to the label game - and it won't fly.

Hang a piece of sculpture over the means of egress - its their business.

Temporary stages - they sure are part of the building officials jurisdiction now. (Could be why this has arisen as an issue recently, as I predicted on another forum.)

Catwalks and pits and elevator pits and gridirons and all kinds of limited or restricted access areas are indeed regulated by the building codes.
 
Just a few more citations from the IBC:

"101.3 Intent.
The purpose of this code is to establish the minimum requirements to safeguard the public health, safety and general welfare through structural strength, means of egress facilities, stability, sanitation, adequate light and ventilation, energy conservation, and safety to life and property from fire and other hazards attributed to the built environment and to provide safety to fire fighters and emergency responders during emergency operations.


104.6 Right of entry.
Where it is necessary to make an inspection to enforce the provisions of this code, or where the building official has reasonable cause to believe that there exists in a structure or upon a premises a condition which is contrary to or in violation of this code which makes the structure or premises unsafe, dangerous or hazardous, the building official is authorized to enter the structure or premises at reasonable times to inspect or to perform the duties imposed by this code, provided that if such structure or premises be occupied that credentials be presented to the occupant and entry requested. If such structure or premises is unoccupied, the building official shall first make a reasonable effort to locate the owner or other person having charge or control of the structure or premises and request entry. If entry is refused, the building official shall have recourse to the remedies provided by law to secure entry.

Definition:
STRUCTURE. That which is built or constructed."

As my building official friends tell me, arguing with a building official is like wrestling with a pig in mud: you get dirty, the pig enjoys it, and the pig almost always wins.
 
So now a few years later I walk into another school to help fix their lighting and I see where they had flown something overstage using cotton clothesline slung over the structural steel above the stage and tied off on a few 2x4's screwed to the stage floor. I quickly advised the director that not only was this crazy, it was incredibly unsafe and downright stupid. He said the summer community theatre was the guilty group!

Sometimes you never know what you'll find onstage at the local school!

I manage the theater department at a very large high school in Minnesota. One summer quite a few years ago we had a children's community theater in and I let the director, who was also the technical director use the scene shop to build a couple of small flats. He quickly lost the use of the shop when I came in and found the safety guard ripped off of my compound miter saw. He tried to cut a piece of muslin with it and it instantly caught and bound. It ripped off the guard and shattered the frame where the guard spring attached. He was lucky he didn't loose a finger... It was a beautiful, brand new Milwaukee saw too.

A year before I worked at the school another community theater group used a yellow, high glossed oil based paint on the stage floor. Two coats. When they left the maintenance department tried painting the floor black again but the yellow kept wearing through. The first thing I did when I got there was had the floor sanded. A lot of money, and 29 coats of paint later (or so the sander guy said) we got down to bare wood. Freshly painted black the new technical director of the community theater was told to be very careful about painting her set, which was a series of draped cheesecloth hung from battens. She painted the first one laid out on the stage floor without a drop cloth... That was the only time I really yelled at someone in the theater (I screamed, "YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME") when I walked in and noticed the fresh white bloch on the floor. I felt bad later when the producer laid into her because she had just paid to have the floor resurfaced.


I have my fair share of community theater stories...
 
Well, the staff at the International Code Council, who publish the IBC, the most widely adopted model building code in the USA along with many other codes and standards, concur that scenery is indeed a structure and subject to the building codes and that in most jurisdictions the building official has the authority to inspect it and require changes or removal.

Now, saying it has to be built like "commercial buildings" is a little extreme. For instance, in the common case of being on a stage in an otherwise enclosed and code compliant building, you can ignore wind and snow loads and other safety issues dealing with weather, including just keeping the rain out. You probably can skip a lot of the sanitation and mechanical (heat and cooling) issues, as that is covered by the building. Electrical is temporary and for the most part, everyone accepts that the National Electric Code applies and has allowances for stages and temporary conditions (albeit the NEC temporary is different - 30 or 60 days?). Fire safety has been addressed, so that basically leaves structure and egress (egress being the basis for guards, stairs, ramps, etc.)

So, there are a lot of exceptions to railings and guards in the IBC, in fact 7, and 5 1/2 deal with auditoriums and stages. We live and work in very unique buildings, with many more code exceptions than other occupancies. Stairs and ramps and egress as well. Based on familiarity and training, and assuming you try to adhere to the AEA rules, there probably isn't a problem with the ramps and escape stairs and high platforms without guards. Doesn't mean you can ignore these issues or have tippy, wobbly stairs or allow non-performers to run around on your sets, nor can you ignore OSHA regulations if the occupants are your employees, but this shouldn't be a hardship.

So that kind of leaves structure as a biggie. I don't think anyone will require a platform to be as strong as a stage, which is 125 or 150 psf depending on which edition of which code applies, but is a loading as strong as a bedroom in a single family house, 40 psf, reasonable? I think you could maybe argue for even less, but 40 or 50 psf seems to be a common criteria. Deflection is tougher, because traditionally the building code was concerned about cracking plaster on the ceiling under if the floor deflected - bend but not brake. Later it adopted a criteria for gypsum wallboard, which was less fragile. And comfort is an issue - people don't usually like bouncy floors (at least adult people) - so the codes still limit deflection for all these concerns - and we may not care how springy the floor is in the Juliet balcony, because the actress is fine and only there for a few minutes and isn't dancing.

I know I can find ply and other structural sheathing that has span ratings printed right on it. I can find tables that have "deemed to comply" criteria, designs and materials sizes that have been proven adequate by time tested use and accepted as adequate by the code development process. And I know that some folks have demonstrated by engineering and by testing other materials and methods. You may also find it useful to show that your scenery is built as described in published books and articles. It would be hard to say that what Parker and Smith said was OK for the last 50 years is not OK.

But frankly used 1/2" MDF on 24" centers seems just too light, and unless the material was stamped with that span rating for floors, I'd probably red tag it as well. And don't forget that span ratings of sheathing is often based on continuous application, and one whole 4 X 8 is stronger than four pieces 4 x 2.

And this has been ratcheted up as a result of the Indiana State Fair stage collapse according to the ICC staffer who hears this from their building official members.
 
And I still haven't seen here what the construction was of the platforms in the original post. 2X4 on what centers? greater than 16" is all I've found. And some material other than ply for the deck but I have not found thickness or specifics of material. Some sheets are rated for floor, and some for walls, and some for roof, and some for combinations, but often with different span ratings based on the application, ie: floor v. wall. Working strictly from recollections, I think you can get away with 15/32 ply on 2' centers on a roof, and it's springy, but you might be able to justify that for a platform of limited occupancy and limited use but not if you have the Seven Brides chorus dancing on it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back