• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Bedroom or storage room or bonus room

I say it is how the room is intended to be used. I am not going to break shoes over labels. I need to know if it will be used for sleeping or not. They could label the "bedroom" and "moordeb", I just want to know if they intend to sleep in it.

It is a good question: as who intends to use it. For purposes of the C.O. it is whoever is the permit holder. If the builder says it won't be used for sleeping purposes, then so be it. You simply cannot protect people from themselves, nor is there a crystal ball to determine if they are telling the truth or not. A subsequent owner may turn a rec room into another bedroom, who knows.
 
All of this adversary stuff has to go away.

We need people who are honest in their intent - both as the permit applicants and as the AHJs.

Who says a doorway makes the "bonus room" a room. It is just part of the adjacent hall. An alcove in the hall so that one can access the storage closet.
 
GH:

There are many threats of lawsuits in these threads, but that may be an exaggeration. I do not really know how it works in New York or California. Here, in my small community, the process is rarely adversarial.

I have preferences . . . and may even be mistaken about this or that code issue. Still, folks usually accomodate me with little fuss.

I try hard to accomodate them as well. I am on a footing or sewer line or underslab plumbing inspection within thirty minutes of receiving a call, and everybody has my phone number. Builders and tradesmen around here appreciate my quick service, and accessibility.

The building industry is a relationship based industry in which it is difficult to reduce all the variables to pat answers and procedures. Relationships rule.
 
JBI said:
Play nice boys... There is no code based arguement for relabeling of interior rooms or spaces by the AHJ.
Click to expand...
IBC Section 1004.1.1 states in part

"Where an intended use is not listed in Table 1004.1.1, the

building official shall establish a use based on a listed use

that most nearly resembles the intended use."

so there is some code based arguement for labeling of interior rooms or spaces....
 
IBC Section 1004.1.1 is for determining design occupant load. You use that if the intended use is not listed in Table 1004.1.1, which it is. I don't see the connection.
 
I have a closet in my office (at work... for umbrellas and jackets and such).. I have a storage locker for office supplies in my office... my dining room at home is packed with computer equipment and code books... our extra bedroom upstairs is a storage room...

My point is.. realtors are the ones who consider a closet in a room as a "bedroom"... take the plans for what they are worth. (I've found that most builders put a smoke detector and egress window in every room that "looks" like a bedroom.

I nap on my couch most afternoons...
 
From our zoning code:

BEDROOM: Each room in excess of three, other than kitchens, baths, laundries, pantries, foyers or

communicating corridors, shall be considered a bedroom, whether or not arranged or intended for

sleeping.

Works for me...no label games...
 
See, when your water and sewer tap fees are also based on number of bedrooms, the label game can be on steroids.
 
Jobsaver said:
I have preferences . . . and may even be mistaken about this or that code issue. Still, folks usually accomodate me with little fuss.
Click to expand...
Giving your personal preferences the force of law is an abuse of power. People accommodate bullies. You should pursue another line of work.
 
TJacobs said:
From our zoning code:BEDROOM: Each room in excess of three, other than kitchens, baths, laundries, pantries, foyers or

communicating corridors, shall be considered a bedroom, whether or not arranged or intended for

sleeping.

Works for me...no label games...
Click to expand...
Wow!

I never knew your zoning code was incorporated into the IBC by reference.
 
Judging intent might come in if there is no label on the room in question.

If the room is called a den, but has a closet, we know what the intent is, because it says it. It is a den with a closet.

If there is no label, you can call it per what you think the intent is. Then when the applicant says (in writing) "it is a den with a closet", then the intent is now made clear. It is a den with a closet in it.
 
For those of you who are making up your own rules about what constitutes a bedroom or sleeping room, you may have gotten away with it for a long time. You may continue to get away with it for a long time. You will not always get away with it, and when your bluff finally gets called, all of your previous malfeasance will come into question.

Nothing gives our profession a bad name more than the code official zealot, who thinks it's his duty to play God, and "protect his lambs" at the expense of enforcing adopted laws.

If it's important to you to consider any room with a closet a bedroom, then write an amendment for your code, and get it approved by your elected officials. Otherwise, you'd better hope I don't move to your jurisdiction, because I DO have a library, game room, office, and loft, and they all have closets, and they will on my next home as well. And you will approve my plans.
 
Jobsaver said:
You should be a politician. You are good at taking what somebody says out of context, slander, and repeating gibberish.
Click to expand...
You are unjustly forcing people to do something.

That's what bullying is.

It's wrong when you're a kid and it's wrong when you're a code official.
 
Well said texasbo however you do not always have to ammend a code to clarify a portion of it. For those who use the zoning or health or the tax appraisers office/department rules as a means to identify a bedroom within their jurisdiction can simply be a matter of policy that is consistent throughout the jurisdiction. It should be a written policy with justification of why. If you would choose to challenge the policy that would be your right and it may be overturned but I doubt malfeasance will come into question.

R104.1 General.

The building official is hereby authorized and directed to enforce the provisions of this code. The building official shall have the authority to render interpretations of this code and to adopt policies and procedures in order to clarify the application of its provisions.

We are prohibted by the state from ammending the codes as adopted by them so a policy is our only option to clarify a provision
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mt, that section of the code is exactly why there is a section in the code for appealing the building official's interpretation. Too many weak interpretations of the code based on " don't think it feels right"
 
Brudgers:

We discuss a thing with those submitting a plan and come to an agreement. And, to date, I have not had anyone buck up to the idea of providing a larger window for egress than originally planned, or adding cabinets for storage instead of a closet for a room that could be used either for an office or a bedroom. Should they chose to buck up, we have an appeals process, both informal or formal (codified).

Still, after discussing the issue in this thread, I do see further need for establishing this criteria by ordinance, or, maybe through zoning (like TJacobs).

But all the talk about bullying is gibberish. So are the references made in this thread to playing God. Its like calling somebody a liar for being five minutes late to an appointment.

What is the purpose of this forum? To learn. To improve. To have fun. Or, to throw stones.
 
mtlogcabin said:
We are prohibted by the state from ammending the codes as adopted by them so a policy is our only option to clarify a provision[/color]
Click to expand...
In Arkansas, we cannot be less restrictive than the code adopted by the state, but can adopt ordinances making the code more restrictive.

The decision whether or not any such more restrictive code by ordinance would become adopted, is ultimately a decision of the City Council.
 
The connection

High Desert said:
IBC Section 1004.1.1 is for determining design occupant load. You use that if the intended use is not listed in Table 1004.1.1, which it is. I don't see the connection.
Click to expand...
The connection, or point was to refute the statement that there is "no basis for AHJ labeling or designating room". I was just offering code text that there is, in some instances, that basis.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top