# Dome Homes



## Glennman CBO (Nov 3, 2010)

Anyone ever approve one of these "dome homes" in their jurisdiction?

http://www.intershelter.com/dome.cfm

We have a submittal for one to be used as a regular residence. They have submitted a complete engineered drawing including a foundation, crawl space, etc. The only issue we have at this point is that they are called "temporary" housing in the manufacturer's specs.

We are still lookng at it from an energy standpoint (Wa St Energy Code). Our plans examiner doesn't want to be the first on the planet to approve something like this. They appear to meet room size requirements, egress, and all the comforts of home.

The particular unit is approx 320 sq ft, and has provisions for a fold away bed, kitchen, laundry, 3/4 bath (shower, toilet, sink). We haven't performed a complete plan review on it yet, but it is so weird, that I thought I'd run it past you all, to see if any of you have been approached with one.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Yankee (Nov 3, 2010)

I want one.

Heat it with a little woodstove and avoid the IECC

I would approve (given the limited info)


----------



## Rio (Nov 4, 2010)

Do they have an insulation rating?


----------



## vegas paul (Nov 4, 2010)

I wouldn't worry about the mfg. specs, as long as it met each code item on its own.  Is there engineering for the structure itself, or only the foundation?


----------



## Glennman CBO (Nov 4, 2010)

We haven't vetted the dome through our energy code just yet, but I remember seeing on the plans that is has R-21 throughout the dome (the floor is R-30). I asked the plans examiner if that will work with our energy code, but he hasn't gotten that far with it yet.

The engineering has everything from calculations on wind affects, seismic, etc of the dome itself, plus the calculations for the foundation. It is loaded with various rebar, connections to the foundation, the floor, etc.

I cannot see anything in the code that prohibits the thing as far as it's architectural features (combo kitchen, living, sleeping areas) egress, room sizes, headroom, etc. Of course it will need a smoke detector. The plumbing fixtures appear to comply and the wiring will need to be approved by our Labor and Industries.

Other than that, it looks like a go.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Nov 4, 2010)

What is the insulation material? If it is foam plastic I do not believe a fiberglass gelcoat finnish (if I am ready the site correctly)  is an approved thermal barrier.


----------



## Jobsaver (Nov 4, 2010)

Next thing, they will be adding your approval letter to thier website list of "credentials". Tread carefully.

I would be more comfortable with a stamped set of specs and drawings, rather than a letter. Also, the R-value would have to be increased to R30 for the ceiling. What constitutes the ceiling?

I like the idea though.


----------



## Jobsaver (Nov 4, 2010)

Correction: R30 for the ceiling in my ahj.


----------



## vegas paul (Nov 4, 2010)

Buckminster Fuller would be proud...


----------



## Glennman CBO (Nov 4, 2010)

They have submitted a complete set of engineered plans and specs.

I don't know what the insulation material is. The plans examiner has the plans on his desk. I'll find out when I get a chance.

The "ceiling" is the same shape as the "roof".


----------



## GHRoberts (Nov 4, 2010)

You have a complete set of engineering plans and specs - much more than most builders will give you , and you don't know if you should approve it?

Perhaps you could quote a code section that you find it does not meet.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Nov 4, 2010)

GHRoberts said:
			
		

> You have a complete set of engineering plans and specs - much more than most builders will give you , and you don't know if you should approve it?Perhaps you could quote a code section that you find it does not meet.


Just how many classroom hours do engineers and architects get during their collage days in code review? What code edition did the instructor use. Engineering principles and practices may stay consistant over the years but the codes change every 3 years and a plan reviewer/inspector can not just assume because it has an engineer/architect stamp that the designer's knowledge has kept up with 100% of the code changes/requirements. FYI I do provide specific code sections when something is not code compliant.


----------



## Glennman CBO (Nov 4, 2010)

I don't know if it meets energy requirements.

It is not mine to approve.

It does sound though like an acceptible residential structure, if it meets code. If the plans examiner finds it meets code, then I think it will be fine.


----------



## FredK (Nov 4, 2010)

Hate to say this but wouldn't a phone/email to them get an answer?


----------



## Yankee (Nov 4, 2010)

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> Just how many classroom hours do engineers and architects get during their collage days in code review? What code edition did the instructor use. Engineering principles and practices may stay consistant over the years but the codes change every 3 years and a plan reviewer/inspector can not just assume because it has an engineer/architect stamp that the designer's knowledge has kept up with 100% of the code changes/requirements. FYI I do provide specific code sections when something is not code compliant.


The engineer should be certifing to a certain scope of his/her work in the area he/she has expertise. Just like us, working engineers keep abreast of the codes and new technology & materials just like we do. Your statement is like saying someone who got their plans review cert 15 years ago isn't up to snuff (well, , , in fact they may not be!).


----------



## mtlogcabin (Nov 4, 2010)

> The engineer should be certifing to a certain scope of his/her work in the area he/she has expertise.


That is my point. Engineers typically specialize in specific fields much like doctors and lawyers. Would you accept a letter from a dentist for an employee to return to work who was out because of a injured back. No. A stamp and a seal does not guarantee code compliance. GHR's post is questioning the need of due diligence by Glennman for reviewing and approving this structure just because there are engineered stamped drawings and specs submitted for this structure.


----------



## Jobsaver (Nov 4, 2010)

Glennman CBO said:
			
		

> The "ceiling" is the same shape as the "roof".


I mean, at what point do the "walls" stop and does the "ceiling/roof" begin. What R value is required in youar area for walls? For ceiling? You have already stated the shell is R21. In my ahj, this would meet wall requirements, but not ceiling.


----------



## texasbo (Nov 4, 2010)

I understand these go for $4 million in California...

This would be a perfect candidate for ICC ER for prefabricated/component construction. ICC or 3rd party certification could answer a lot of these questions. The design engineering may help with a lot of the issues, but probably isn't adequate to ensure complete code compliance.

These give new meaning to the word "tacky".


----------



## Yankee (Nov 4, 2010)

texasbo said:
			
		

> These give new meaning to the word "tacky".


Ahh, one man's "tacky" is another's "cool"


----------



## GHRoberts (Nov 4, 2010)

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> Just how many classroom hours do engineers and architects get during their collage days in code review? What code edition did the instructor use. Engineering principles and practices may stay consistant over the years but the codes change every 3 years and a plan reviewer/inspector can not just assume because it has an engineer/architect stamp that the designer's knowledge has kept up with 100% of the code changes/requirements. FYI I do provide specific code sections when something is not code compliant.


I think you misunderstand what engineers do. They read the code book and then design to it. Most companies then do an internal code compliance review and then have an outside code professional do a review. (A code book costs less than the shipping on the structure and can be charged to every buyer.)

Ignoring any local code amendments these types of structures are code compliant.

My question arose because Glennman CBO expressed the opinion that he did not want to be the first to approve the structures. That is not a valid basis for not approving a structure.


----------



## Jobsaver (Nov 4, 2010)

How are they code compliant if they do not meet R value criteria?


----------



## brudgers (Nov 4, 2010)

Obviously the solution should be to follow the standard procedure of the ICC.

1. "encourage" industry members to join.

2. write 64 pages of prescriptive dome requirements into the IRC.


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Nov 5, 2010)

brudgers,

Can a domed home have just one smoke detector and one big sprinkler head and meet the code? Just asking?

pc1


----------



## Yankee (Nov 5, 2010)

Jobsaver said:
			
		

> How are they code compliant if they do not meet R value criteria?


If they do not have a heating system that uses fossil fuel.


----------



## Jobsaver (Nov 5, 2010)

Yankee said:
			
		

> If they do not have a heating system that uses fossil fuel.


I am not aware of this provision. Please explain or reference. Thanks.


----------



## Robert Ellenberg (Nov 5, 2010)

This thread made me want to share how I work with an engineer regarding the code.  I divide the code into two parts; structural and everything else.   He is only responsible for structural (and it is my responsibility to tell him what doesn't comply) and I, as the designer, am responsible for everything else which is basically health, safety, energy etc.  For example, I am working on a design where I want to attach the sill to the piers and set them 8' on center and the code calls for them to be spaced no more than 6' apart.  I am planning to use a steel girder for the sill/band and large angle iron attachment brackets.  It is my job to point out to the engineer that this does not meet prescrptive code, ask him to do calculations to see if it is as strong and if not, specify what is.  In turn, those calculations should be a part of my plan submittal.  But the code gives specific parameters that must be met for everything that is not structural in nature and just because an engineer would think it is OK and stamps it in no way makes it acceptable.  It is my job to see that windows are large enough and close enough to the floor etc.  There are areas regarding heat loss etc. that an engineer in thermal dynamics can help design specifications for but the materials and barriers still have to meet the fire code requirements related to safety.


----------



## Glennman CBO (Nov 5, 2010)

GH Roberts,

I didn't say that I didn't want to be the first one to approve it. I said that our plans exaniner didn't want to be the first.

You're right in that that is no excuse to not approve something. That's why I told him I would help in his research by going to this board.

I can see his point in that when the neighbors see this thing going up, and they go to the city council and ask who approved this weird looking dome to be erected on the lot next to their house, he wants to be sure that the thing is fully vetted!

I love the thing and think it's great.


----------



## GHRoberts (Nov 5, 2010)

Sorry for my misunderstanding.

I certainly understand why neighbors would not appreciate such a structure.

I expect that your office has a check list that includes what to do when the engineering issues are outside of your staff's areas of expertise.


----------



## rktect 1 (Nov 5, 2010)

Is there a basement option?


----------



## Glennman CBO (Nov 5, 2010)

Well, there's no basement under this one, but I'm sure that could be drawn in.

GH...I wish they did.


----------



## Yankee (Nov 5, 2010)

Jobsaver said:
			
		

> I am not aware of this provision. Please explain or reference. Thanks.


_Introduction  _

_Internationally, code officials recognize the need for a modern, up-to-date energy conservation code addressing the design of energy-efficient building envelopes and installation of energy efficient mechanical, lighting and power systems through requirements emphasizing performance. The International Energy Conservation Code®, in this 2009 edition, is designed to meet these needs through model __*code regulations that will result in the optimal utilization of fossil fuel*__ and nondepletable resources in all communities, large and small. _



Well, maybe it doesn't say exactly what I'd like it to, but my position is that if a dwelling is providing its own renewable source of energy such as wood heat or alternative energy heat and there is no cooling load, the insulation requirements shouldn't apply.

Why would they?


----------



## Jobsaver (Nov 6, 2010)

Thanks Yankee. asking, "Why would they?" , while reading the code book is considered a violation by some.

One day, a man cut a tree down on his own property to build his own cabin, and the government said, you can't do that without first getting our permission. The man thought about it for awhile with this question in mind: "Why would they?"


----------



## Yankee (Nov 6, 2010)

Jobsaver said:
			
		

> Thanks Yankee. asking, "Why would they?" , while reading the code book is considered a violation by some.One day, a man cut a tree down on his own property to build his own cabin, and the government said, you can't do that without first getting our permission. The man thought about it for awhile with this question in mind: "Why would they?"


A bit different scenario I'd say. If he cut his own tree down for the wood stove (and maybe planted another for the wood stove in 20 years), I'd say the energy code shouldn't apply or effect this system. If a man cuts a tree and builds his house, someone else will likely be living in it in during the building lifetime.


----------

