New Help with Code Inspector re: Tempered Glass

Adding a new sunroom off the back of my house, with full windows. I am having a bit of a gentlemens disagreement with the permit inspector about the need for tempered glass in a certain window, and could use help in providing proof that it is not needed.

First off, I am in Ohio, and here is the code I believe we are following:

The pertinent section says:

I believe in my instance, Exception number 3 is in play for the following window:

As you can see, while it is in the 2’ arch, it is in the plane of a wall that is perpendicular and on the latch side of the door.

I am trying to find visual examples to explain why it is ok, and not finding much. Anyone have a legit document I could use to show him?


The bottom line here is… The AHJ has the final say in all code interpretations and allowances for the municipality he/she is employed by. Like it or not, you have no real recourse. A visit with “his boss” may help, but it may also only help in pissing off the people that you need to get your project completed. Choose your battles wisely. IMO, this isn’t the battle to fight. Pay the few extra dollars for the upgraded glass and forget about it.

Your picture isn’t showing.

But in general, if there is glass with in 18" of a floor, it should be tempered.

If you have kids, or kids ever come over to your house, or you one day plan to sell, then you might as well do it right the 1st time.

Not sure why the image is not showing…trying again.

I can appreciate the sentiment, but if that is the case, then why do they add the exceptions to the code?

I have found two examples since I posted that that seem to favor my side:

(second picture example)

Figure 5

What did the AHJ say when you showed him the exceptions to that part of the code?
Maybe a smaller town has another code that they follow.

I believe you are correct. That window would not have to be tempered if the door does not swing into it, and the sill is at least 18" above the floor. If AHJ has a different interpretation, they are required to show you that reference in their local amendments to the building code.

He said that I am interpreting it wrong, and that is not what it means. Said he has another document that shows examples of the opposite.

He agrees the language is in there, just that it does not apply here.

I sent off a polite note today with my examples, and hopefully that satisfies him.

Go with the AHJ inspector, he has the authority.

No. There is no reference to door “swing” in the standard and the minimum height at the bottom is 60 inches to qualify for the height exception. It’s to protect against human impact, not impact by the door.

Yes, he has the authority in this situation, but isn’t he wrong?

" Glazing in walls on the latch side of and perpendicular to the plane of the door in a closed position. "

That window is glazing in a wall that is perpendicular to the door, and that wall is on the latch side. No swinging mentioned in the code, and no swinging door here.

It used to reference door swing. Now it just says latch side…same thing, different side. If any window glazing is less than 18" and more than 36" from the floor, and is >9sf in a walkway, it is a hazardous location. R308.4.2 and R308.4.3

The code is for Hinged doors that may swing into the window glazing, not for windows adjacent to a Sliding door.

Show me

IRC 2006

  1. Glazing in Section R308.4, Item 6, in walls perpendicular
    to the plane of the door in a closed position,
    other than the wall toward which the door swings
    when opened
    , or where access through the door is to
    a closet or storage area 3 feet (914 mm) or less in
    depth. Glazing in these applications shall comply
    with Section R308.4, Item 7.

The 2006 commentary expands on the discussion regarding the door swing and includes a diagram - I concede on the swing discussion. Thanks for making the point.

Thought I would close the story on this. Final inspection was this week by a different inspector. I was not here but wrote up my reasoning, and included examples I had found.

No feedback other than it was passed. Works for me!