Yikes
Gold Member
I have a project in a major California city where their former housing department (as a recipient and distributor of federal funds) was sued for certifying projects as UFAS compliant when they weren't. In response, the successor city agency to that department has now required the building department to route all plans to them for plan check of UFAS, ADA, FHA, etc., and they are developing their own CASp-like interpretations of these regs that in many cases exceed what is written in the codes. They are doing this even on projects where they are not a funder.
In my opinion, when a city is acting as the Authority Having Jurisdiction on a project whether they have no other stake (finance or ownership, etc.), they can only enforce the codes within their authority. If the plans demonstrate compliance with the locally adopted Building Code, they cannot withhold permit while they check for non-adopted UFAS, ADA and FHA according to their own interpretations.
I'm looking for the most appropriate code sections that would state this firmly, and I'm coming up with CBC 104.1 and 104.2 which state the building official is authorized to enforce "this code". I can't find anything that limits their enforcement of codes that are NOT under their jurisdiction. How do I best state this?
In my opinion, when a city is acting as the Authority Having Jurisdiction on a project whether they have no other stake (finance or ownership, etc.), they can only enforce the codes within their authority. If the plans demonstrate compliance with the locally adopted Building Code, they cannot withhold permit while they check for non-adopted UFAS, ADA and FHA according to their own interpretations.
I'm looking for the most appropriate code sections that would state this firmly, and I'm coming up with CBC 104.1 and 104.2 which state the building official is authorized to enforce "this code". I can't find anything that limits their enforcement of codes that are NOT under their jurisdiction. How do I best state this?