Ft. Meyers Meeting
The development work of the SBTC and its workgroups has involved an intense effort to produce the first public version of the IGCC in a very short time period. Throughout the drafting process, participants have focused on developing a version that will be usable, adoptable, enforceable, and produce intended results. The fourth of five meetings in this drafting process took place in Ft. Meyers, Florida over three days in December. The results of that meeting indicate that the combined efforts of all parties involved have achieved the critical tipping point in the development process. The first three SBTC meetings largely reflected the efforts of each individual work group in identifying, researching, debating, and resolving issues and content within their specifically assigned topical areas. The Ft. Meyers meeting marked the point where a fully-integrated code document could be seen to emerge—a whole greater than the sum of its parts.
The emerging document (Version 4, which is posted) reflects the great vision of this development process regarding the necessity of code mandates without stifling innovation . The working draft contains actual language to this effect. Chapter 1, Administration, sets the tone with regard to innovative approaches: “It is intended that the provisions of this code provide flexibility to allow and encourage the use of innovative approaches and techniques to achieve compliance with the intent of the code.” This is reinforced in the proposed “Roadmap to the IGCC,” which states, “Chapter 3 (General Compliance) is formatted to facilitate the customization of this code to address local agendas; encourage construction which exceeds the minimum requirements of this code; and encourage the implementation of best practices which are difficult to mandate.”
The structure of this code document will facilitate effective implementation. As an integrated overlay on the existing family of I-Codes, this new model code will provide minimum threshold mandates for purposes of national consistency in sustainable construction, giving it a familiar feel to experienced I-Code users. However, that is only part of the unique IGCC story; due to wide variations in climate and geography throughout the country, as well as the challenges of differing site locations (urban infill, suburban, and rural), the structure of the draft IGCC anticipates customized requirements above or in addition to the expressed minimum thresholds on a local basis where national or blanket mandates would not be appropriate. While each of the existing model codes is subject to local amendment, the IGCC will be the first to provide jurisdictions with workable options for alternative thresholds within the body and structure of the model code itself.
This is achieved by the inclusion of compliance electives. Compliance electives are the vehicles by which this code encourages the implementation of environmentally beneficial practices which may not be appropriate as strict mandatory requirements in all situations. They are also used to encourage construction and performance which exceed the minimum requirements of the code as adopted. Once the required number of compliance electives have been submitted by the design professional in responsible charge and approved by the jurisdiction, these too become mandates for the building and site in question. A review of Chapter 3 in Version 4 of the draft document will demonstrate where minimum model code thresholds, local requirements, and compliance electives each fit within the structure of this code.
A tremendous effort has also gone into development of the metrics within the document. The SBTC mission has been to produce a draft code that emphasizes performance outcomes over specific design mandates, placing the ability to measure performance high on the agenda. Recognizing the dangers inherent in ambiguous code requirements, the work groups have each put exhaustive efforts into the metrics provided within the body and tables—researching available standards, gathering input from recognized subject matter experts, and analyzing alternative approaches, in all cases seeking to find measurement tools that are understandable, usable, and most of all, effective. The results of these efforts will benefit both those responsible for designing buildings in compliance with this code, and those responsible for enforcing its mandated provisions.
The draft development process is not yet complete, but the finish line is well within sight. The final meeting of the SBTC is scheduled for January 28-30 in Austin, Texas, and the workgroups are all operating in overdrive to put the final touches on their work in preparation for that meeting. Judging by the tremendous progress shown between the Philadelphia and Ft. Meyers meetings, there is a high degree of optimism that the final version ensuing from the Austin meeting will meet the Committee’s mandate from the ICC Board and be ready for public access, review and comment prior to its entry into 2012 family of I-Codes.
Additional information and updates on SBTC progress, is available here.