Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Wall Roof Cutoff 60deg topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee approves opinion using 60-degree cutoff to distinguish wall from roof

3275826 · May 12, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The committee approved an opinion interpreting the International Building Code and Washington State residential code to use a 60-degree angle as the cutoff between wall and roof assemblies for purposes raised in a proponent question; the opinion will be forwarded to the full council.

The Mechanical Ventilation, Plumbing & Energy Codes Committee approved a staff opinion that uses a 60-degree angle as the cutoff between wall and roof assemblies for application of energy-code provisions.

Members said the 60-degree threshold appears in the International Building Code and in Washington State residential energy-code provisions for distinguishing walls from roofs and therefore is a reasonable, defensible reference point for the opinion. Committee members recalled that the issue had been discussed at the Building, Fire, and Residential & Wholesale (BFRW) committee and sent forward for the committee's consideration.

The staff draft opinion cites the IBC and the state residential energy code language that treat a 60-degree plane as the demarcation for fenestration and exterior-wall versus roof assemblies. Some members noted the question included atypical building examples (below-grade or bermed structures) that were attached by the proponent; those examples do not change the committee's stated interpretation but may raise separate application questions for unusual geometries.

After discussion, a committee member moved to approve the opinion as drafted and Todd Bayreuther seconded; the motion passed on voice vote. The committee directed staff to communicate the approved opinion to the requesting jurisdiction and to include the issue for possible further review if jurisdictions raise practical application questions for atypical buildings.