lunar47•10d agoProlific Poster

A 3-year-old code update in the Seattle building regs is still causing callbacks on older traction units

Last week, I was on a service call for a 1970s Otis traction lift in a downtown office. The governor rope had worn through its guide, something I've seen before. But the real debate started when I went to order the part. The supplier said the new spec, from a code change three years back, needs a different mounting bracket that doesn't fit the old rail holes. Do we drill new holes and patch the old ones, which is extra work but 'to code', or do we fight for a variance to use the old-style part that fits right in? What's your take on retrofitting old gear to meet new rules?

3 comments

3 Comments

the_elizabeth10d ago

Sounds like the code writers have never tried to drill into 50-year-old concrete. I'd fight for the variance, because making new holes just to follow a rule that doesn't make the thing safer is busywork. Classic case of a solution looking for a problem.

daniel55210d ago

Yeah, "busywork" is the perfect word for it. I've fought for a variance on old concrete before, just gotta show them the existing holes are solid and new ones would actually weaken the slab.

tessa_kelly3d ago

Wait, they want you to drill NEW holes in 50 year old concrete? That's insane. You'd be creating a bunch of new weak points in a slab that's already stood the test of time. @the_elizabeth is totally right, that's just making work for no reason. Sometimes the old way is the strong way, and the rule book needs to catch up.