• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Navigating the Complexities of Building Code Adoption and the Role of AHJs

Navigating the Complexities of Building Code Adoption and the Role of AHJs

Author: Jeff Remas



Introduction: Understanding the Limits of Authority

A recent discussion in The Building Code Forum highlighted a prevalent misconception about the limits of the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) in the realm of building codes. As building officials, our authority is often misunderstood, both in scope and limitations. This article aims to clarify the intricacies of building code processes across various municipalities and states, and the pivotal role of building officials within these frameworks.


State and Local Code Adoption: A Diverse Landscape

In the United States, the process of adopting and enforcing building codes varies significantly from state to state. States like Connecticut, Florida, and Massachusetts follow a state-level code adoption with little room for local variations. In contrast, states such as California, Georgia, and New York adopt state-level codes but permit local municipalities to implement amendments that reflect their unique geographical and climatic conditions. Meanwhile, states like Alabama and Texas delegate the adoption of building codes entirely to local jurisdictions, leading to a diverse and complex regulatory landscape.


The Role of Building Officials in Code Adoption

Building officials, acting as AHJs, play a crucial role in the interpretation and enforcement of building codes. However, contrary to common belief, they do not possess unlimited power to amend or interpret building codes at will. Their interpretations and administrative guidelines must align with established codes and regulations. This limitation is crucial to prevent undue influence from political or private organizations that might seek to weaken building codes for their benefit.


The Evolution of Model Building Codes

The shift towards unified model building codes in the U.S. was driven by a desire to reduce complexity and avoid duplicated efforts across different jurisdictions. This evolution has led to a few model codes dominating the landscape, primarily due to economies of scale, network effects, and high switching costs. Understanding this historical context is essential in appreciating the current state of building code adoption and the role of AHJs within this framework.


The Importance of Checks and Balances

The article underscores the need for checks and balances in the building code adoption process. It is vital to maintain safety standards and consistency in enforcement, ensuring that building codes serve their intended purpose of safeguarding public health and safety. As building officials, we must navigate these complexities with integrity and a commitment to the communities we serve.


About the Author

Jeff Remas, a seasoned building official, brings years of experience and expertise to the discussion of building codes and their enforcement. With a deep understanding of the nuances of code adoption processes and the responsibilities of AHJs, Jeff Remas provides a unique perspective on the challenges and opportunities in this field.


References

  1. "Which U.S. States Adopt State vs Local Building Codes" - OneClickCode
  2. "The Building Code Adoption Process" - Stateside
  3. "How Are Building Codes Adopted?" - Department of Energy
  4. "How Building Codes Work in the US" - Brian Potter

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any agency or organization.
 
The Evolution of Model Building Codes

The shift towards unified model building codes in the U.S. was driven by a desire to reduce complexity and avoid duplicated efforts across different jurisdictions. This evolution has led to a few model codes dominating the landscape, primarily due to economies of scale, network effects, and high switching costs. Understanding this historical context is essential in appreciating the current state of building code adoption and the role of AHJs within this framework.

"A few" model codes? What else is out there other than the ICC family of model codes? Yes, I know California still uses the IPC, but even New York has gone to the ICC codes. And it's not entirely due to economies of scale.

I've been at this long enough to have seen the other side. You don't have to be as old as I am to remember when the country was divided into three camps: BOCA, ICBO, and SSBCC. Those three organizations didn't merge into the ICC entirely out of the goodness of their hearts, or entirely because of economies of scale. In fact, a very large impetus came from the United States government, which had grown tired of dealing with different building codes whenever they wanted to build a building. Of course, they could (and largely did) exempt themselves from mandatory compliance with any building code, but both the GSA and the DOD had a general rule that they would follow the code in effect wherever a project was to be built.

So the feds tired of constantly making changes to what were supposed to be universal, standard buildings, and they (the feds) went to the three model code organizations and laid down a challenge: "Either you guys get your act together, or we (the federal government) will write our own national building code and we'll put you all out of business." And the rest, as they say, is history. The NFPA made a lame attempt to get into the game at that point by creating a competing model building code. It was a horrible code and it died an inglorious death -- as it should have.

xx
 
Back
Top