If there are conflicts in material specifications in the IBC, what is considered the safest approach?

When faced with conflicts in material specifications according to the International Building Code (IBC), opting for the most restrictive guidance is recognized as the safest approach. This strategy minimizes the risk of non-compliance or safety issues that could arise from using materials that may not meet the necessary standards or building code requirements.

By adhering to the most restrictive guidance, you ensure that the project's safety and integrity are prioritized, especially when dealing with complex building requirements. This often involves following stricter provisions that may be established either by the building code itself or by local amendments that enhance safety measures.

In comparison, while consulting with the architect may provide insight, it could still lead to ambiguities if the architect's interpretation does not align with the strictest standards. Similarly, using the most innovative materials may introduce unforeseen risks if those materials have not been thoroughly vetted by the IBC. Following local regulations only could also pose risks if those regulations are less stringent than the IBC, potentially resulting in safety violations. Thus, leaning on the most restrictive guidance is a prudent and responsible course of action.