A History of Code Compliance Abuse : Case in Point - Riverwalk Saloon, Lehighton, PA

[jar546]

It's hard to go from basically nothing to something very structured and expect it to take less than 20 to 30 years to get it on track. Heck some places take 12 years to update model code adoptions, yet alone get a smooth-running oversight working.

That area of PA, as those that have worked it know, was the do what you want no one really checks for over a century, then the state says here you go follow this and you can't expect the little towns to jump on board when those that live there, more than likely don't like the new rules being mandated by the state anyway.

Not saying I agree, just that until the old guard is gone, the mind set changes, and the incoming residents agree with the what the state has set in place, you will have these types of problems.

Pulling a permit in many of those jurisdictions comes with a questioner, select from the following list of third-party firms you wish to have review and inspect your project, and oh by the way, once selected, you can't change. So, pick wisely.

Since the back story is the town was not financially strong enough to stand firm, and I will guess the county can't technically step in and help, the state should have built in a problem child division, that small towns could refer back to L&I to enforce and oversee, and it comes with additional fees that accommodated being tacked on for taking over.

Call it a referral program per say. And to the problem child, our local division is not able to provide review and inspections due to the level of complexity with your project, for this reason your plans and project are being transferred to the proper state division in L&I. Call it a carrot and stick division, either work with the locals and follow the rules, or have to deal with more eyes and deeper pockets.

From what I have seen come across my desk, it is simpler and less costly to just rip down and build new, than to try and comply with converting many of the existing structures in that area.

The municipality could have chosen to opt out of the UCC and L&I would handle all commercial projects. Instead, they chose to opt-in and then bought the responsibility of actually enforcing the UCC. In this case, this is all on the Building Official at the time for allowing this to happen, showing his/her incompetence. There is no excuse for this behavior, no matter how much of a change. This was 6 years into the UCC which solidifies my point. It is not like this was in the beginning or even during grandfathering of commercial inspectors. It was afterwards.

 

[tbz]

I agree with you Jeff,

But what I have seen is locals wanting to step up, and then get themselves in over their head and not have the backing or desire to fight it.

It probably would have been simpler for them to opt out for the amount of permits they probably see in a year, but is there a way to opt in, and drop some may be the commercial back to L&I?

Back in the 70's and early 80's family did a good bit of work up north just south of Montrose, I remember submitting architectural and structural drawings for an open air, call it a pole bar design, to cover a stage at the camp and allow the audience to sit out of the rain to watch. The complete application came back from L&I stamped, as no permit required for pole barns, and the drawings clearly showed not ag. Both the architect & engineer went to Harrisburg to confirm, no permit required. Things have changed in forty years - but those that worked without a net and no oversight can sometimes make it hell to a small office.

 

[Inspector Gadget]

What I'm seeing here is a drastic call for a state-level, if not federal level for minimum qualification for inspectors - and inspectors that are public servants, not private contractors.

Or in other words, lordee, this shows the strength of what we have up here in Canada.

 

[tbz]

What I'm seeing here is a drastic call for a state-level, if not federal level for minimum qualification for inspectors - and inspectors that are public servants, not private contractors.

Or in other words, lordee, this shows the strength of what we have up here in Canada.

IG, not sure how long and how strong the code enforcement has been in place up north in your area, but there was no way for a state the size of PA to go from a large portion of the state not having any code enforcement in the rural and semi-rural suburban areas, to the next day having qualified building departments.

When they implemented the statewide building code in early 2000's, and I am not fully sure I even know the full course of action, each local AHJ had the option I believe to either opt in or out and let the state handle it. Even the state was not going to be able to cover such a large and vast area and the number of applications that would now be coming through the door. As such they instituted the option for the local AHJ to hire, certified 3rd party companies to do the actual plan reviews and inspections. Some local AHJ contracted with one 3rd party firm, while others gave the applicant the choice to choose from a list of approved firms.

It seems, that the town Jeff was doing contract work for, allowed the option to pick from a list, and it seems when the applicant did not like their first pick's review, they asked to use another firm, which seemed to be in line somewhat with the first subcontracted firm, so they picked another till they found one that decided to accept the sub compliant application. Hence post one in the thread, the local AHJ not willing to lock in the applicants first pick, not change firms and back the results of the first plan review.

Without an overall high-density population, over vast areas of the state. I will venture the 3rd party system will stay in place for many years, but as local AHJ get larger and more populated, they will bring everything under one roof and discontinue using 3rd party sub-contractors eventually.

 

[tmurray]

IG, not sure how long and how strong the code enforcement has been in place up north in your area, but there was no way for a state the size of PA to go from a large portion of the state not having any code enforcement in the rural and semi-rural suburban areas, to the next day having qualified building departments.

When they implemented the statewide building code in early 2000's, and I am not fully sure I even know the full course of action, each local AHJ had the option I believe to either opt in or out and let the state handle it. Even the state was not going to be able to cover such a large and vast area and the number of applications that would now be coming through the door. As such they instituted the option for the local AHJ to hire, certified 3rd party companies to do the actual plan reviews and inspections. Some local AHJ contracted with one 3rd party firm, while others gave the applicant the choice to choose from a list of approved firms.

It seems, that the town Jeff was doing contract work for, allowed the option to pick from a list, and it seems when the applicant did not like their first pick's review, they asked to use another firm, which seemed to be in line somewhat with the first subcontracted firm, so they picked another till they found one that decided to accept the sub compliant application. Hence post one in the thread, the local AHJ not willing to lock in the applicants first pick, not change firms and back the results of the first plan review.

Without an overall high-density population, over vast areas of the state. I will venture the 3rd party system will stay in place for many years, but as local AHJ get larger and more populated, they will bring everything under one roof and discontinue using 3rd party sub-contractors eventually.

I understand what you are driving at. Bringing in a code to an area that has either not had a code, or the code was not enforced is challenging. Trust me, one of those jurisdictions is where I cut my teeth. In those you do need to have a code enforcement strategy to prioritize your enforcement because you are not going to be able to enforce everything on day one. This being said, I'm not sure I would let a bar/restaurant be one of the architypes of buildings I save for later given the high life safety risk.

As you have suggested, the simple fact that there are 3rd party code agencies is not a problem. We have them in most provinces in Canada. The regulation of these agencies and the interaction with the local building official is the issue. When at least two agencies issue a certificate of non-conformance, a third agency should not be able to issue a certificate of conformance on those same plans.

There are some strategies that can help minimize some of these issues. Most provinces in Canada, the building official gets their authority to interpret and apply the code directly from the province. local governments and rural areas decide who to hire, but where the authority to enforce the code is not delegated to them, they have no ability to tell the official how to interpret the code. This is not to suggest that they cannot manage their employee, but their management in the local official is just to ensure they are exercising procedural fairness. Basically, local management cannot tell Inspector Gadget to release a permit if he has concerns around code compliance. Regardless of the municipality's ability to afford a lawyer, the code official cannot issue a permit.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

Before PA adopted the ICC codes in 2004 it was the state's job to inspect all commercial jobs since 1924. But they had their own code and was not nearly as much as what the ICC codes require.
But we are always finding commercial buildings that do not have a C. O.

 

[Inspector Gadget]

IG, not sure how long and how strong the code enforcement has been in place up north in your area, but there was no way for a state the size of PA to go from a large portion of the state not having any code enforcement in the rural and semi-rural suburban areas, to the next day having qualified building departments.

I've been living that reality for my career. This week, I crafted illustrated guides for concrete slabs because it's the next thing we're focussing on as we improve Code awareness among contractors. Two years ago, it was window flashing.

It's a slow grind educating the contractors. But therein lies the issue - contractors should know, even if the inspectors don't.

Interestingly, our province just had a coroner's report on a workplace accident. Among the report's suggestions was the request to have contractors licenced (ie: trained and regulated.)

I'm not much of one for such things generally, but lordy, that would be a plus.

Then again, our province currently has no requirement for trained building inspectors, either, and politicians have balked at it for various reasons that several folks are working hard to eliminate. Until then, nothing stops Smallville from hiring Ted, a guy who builds crap decks on the side but happens to be the father of the mayor's best friend.

Basically, local management cannot tell Inspector Gadget to release a permit if he has concerns around code compliance.

That's a plus. Unfortunately, the flipside is that the regulations don't allow for more effective enforcement of people who just don't care, and will build what they want without a permit.