• 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

Good point. For those of you that are in states with state adopted building codes and are prohibiting from amending the code, I would urge you to get an interpretation from the state. Hey, if they're on board with calling a room with a closet a bedroom, then you're covered.

If there is a policy in a jurisdiction to require people to do something that is not adopted by ordinance, and you intentionally continue to do it, knowing full well that you have no ordinance backing you, then I have every reason to contend that malfeasance will be called into question, as what I've described is the very essence of malfeasance.

mtlogcabin said:
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
Click to expand...
 
texasbo said:
If there is a policy in a jurisdiction to require people to do something that is not adopted by ordinance, and you intentionally continue to do it, knowing full well that you have no ordinance backing you, then I have every reason to contend that malfeasance will be called into question, as what I've described is the very essence of malfeasance.
Click to expand...
I think the issue has been more one of interpretation of how a room for sleeping is defined. Civility calls for an assumption that the code official has the authority to make an interpretation, even if it is a wrong one, which can be established through the appeals process.
 
Jobsaver said:
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.
Click to expand...
The reason people comply is because you are holding their permit hostage.
 
Jobsaver said:
Civility calls for an assumption that the code official has the authority to make an interpretation, even if it is a wrong one
Click to expand...
Questioning your authority is bad manners?

You should pursue another line of work.
 
Jobsaver said:
I think the issue has been more one of interpretation of how a room for sleeping is defined. Civility calls for an assumption that the code official has the authority to make an interpretation, even if it is a wrong one, which can be established through the appeals process.
Click to expand...
Well, one thing I know for certain: it's not defined by the presence of a closet, unless you've added such wording to your ordinance. An interpretation is one thing, the application of arbitrary criteria is another. I would counter that civility calls for government officials to refrain from random requirements that interfere with the rights of citizens.
 
Tex: I am in agreement on all three points. Can this legally be established in the Zoning ordinance like in TJacob's ahj?

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...
 
I have on numerous occasions been forced to do something not required by the code because of a concern that the plan checker would hold the project hostage. On one occasion the calculations I provided clearly complied with the code but because the plan checker was defending old practices I was forced to redo the calculations. Because our client did not pay us to redo the calculations it cost us money. There is little difference between these experiences and extortion.

The fact that the applicant accomodates an interpretation often means that it is easier to accomodate than to argue.
 
Jobsaver: I'm sure TJ has had the City Attorney look over the ordinance. However, I would be much more comfortable if there was a tie between the zoning and building code. For exmple, "yard" as defined in the zoning ordinance may be very different from the definition in the building code.

It would be so easy to err on the side of caution and add language to your building code ordinance such as, "bedroom or sleeping room as defined by the zoning ordinance of the city of _______".
 
I support the legal principal that when there is a reasonable difference of opinion regarding a code interpretation that the applicant is allowed to use his interpretation. Thus baring some provision to the contrary the room label on the drawings would govern. It is then the occupants obligation not to use other rooms fro sleeping.

I believe that the concern that people will try to pull a fast one is counter productive and is intrusive. Why should I not be able to have closets in my office? What would keep me from installing cabinets in place of closets?

If the owner tries to claim more bedrooms when selling the house issue a citation. If you have evidence of too many occupants or people using more rooms for sleeping issue citations otherwise step back and take a big breath and let the issue drop. Do we want 2AM inspections to see where people are sleeping.

Jurisdictions should be careful not to use their right to interpret the code to in effect ammend the code.

I do not see a need to ammend the definition of "sleeping unit" in the IBC. Since the IBC uses the term sleeping unit it would appear that introducting the term bedroom has the potential of causeing confusion.

Definitions in the zoning code would not be applicable to the building code unless there was an amendment to the building code that said that you should go to the zoning ordinance for definitions. Be careful that there are not other definitions that could cause problems in the building code. If you have the authority to adopt such an amendment then why not put it in the building code.
 
If I had to rely on our zoning code for definitions, I would be in a world of hurt! I think it depends on the individual state law whether you can do that or not. Where I'm at, we cannot utilize our zoning code requirements to enforce a building code. That's like using a Serbian dictionary to define a Chineese word. It ain't gonna come out the same.
 
Mark K said:
Jurisdictions should be careful not to use their right to interpret the code to in effect ammend the code.
Click to expand...
I support this principle. In 2003, upon obtaining authority in my ahj, I spearheaded a successful effort to revise all of our building codes to eliminate fifty years worth of miscellaneous ordinances, (about 70), creating more restrictive elements to the basic State Codes. I prefer less regulation, but, do believe the intent of the minimum code is to provide egress and interconnected smokes for all rooms in a house, for the life of that house, that are likely to be used as bedrooms.

I do not need to take a big breath on the citation issue. I have issued two citations, both during daytime hours, over the course of ten years. I am not big on heavy-handed government, and am frequently considered anti-government by my employers.

The error is in defining bedrooms. It comes from both being raised in and having a large family. In a move, the rooms with doors and closets were the first to be spoken for as bedrooms, and there were always more kids than rooms.

I believe, especially after exploring this thread, that there exists a deficiency in the code because it attempts to address having more restrictive life safety requirements for bedrooms, but is so ambiguous in the definition, it fails to address much of anything.
 
Jobsaver said:
Mark K:Glad you chimed in on this thread. Is it your opinion that the definition for a bedroom, (sleeping room), can be legally established in the zoning code, as is the case in TJacob's jurisdiction?
Click to expand...
I am not Mark K, but, yes it can be legally established in the zoning code for the purposes of zoning. It cannot be legally established in the zoning code for the purposes of the building code (assuming the "building code" is not a locally defined code, but code such as the IRC), even in the event that the building code is adopted locally through (as referenced by) the zoning code.

No.
 
In most jurisdictions, the zoning code is going to prevail.. and I like TJ's ordinance.. if it's not anything else, it's a bedroom... because it can be used as a sleeping room.
 
I agree a bedroom is what is labled on the plans and would have a smoke detector and egress window. The number of bedrooms is what would be on the CO and that would be it as far as the building department is concerned.

I have worked where bedrooms governed septic sizes, once the health department approved what rooms where bedrooms then I made sure they complied with the building code.

Just because you know another departments criteria for identifying a bedroom do not do their work. We would not issue a building permit without septic approval and the plan submitted to us had to match the floor plan approved by the health department. Simple
 
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...
So all of the rooms listed below would be a bedroom?

- Living rooms

- Dining rooms

- Toilet rooms (without a bath)

- Office/den

- Game/rec room,and

- any other room that wasn't excluded by the above denfinition
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Check out this post on this subject on the archived ICC bb. I think this person does a good job of addressing this issue.

tsmith

Frequent Contributor

posted 04-08-2004 02:11 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm an architect, not a building official, so I'm not in a position of "telling people" anything. I'm simply relating what I have learned -- that a great many jurisdictions nationwide resolve this ambiguity in the code by coming up with their own policy defining a bedroom.

In the home plans that I'm involved in designing, I have to take this into account. I don't put a closet in an enclosed room unless I intend to count it as a bedroom, and show an egress window.

A key word is "enclosed" -- not many living rooms nowadays are fully enclosed and separated from the rest of the house, with access only by a single door. If I did design a den/study/library/computer room which I did not want to count as a bedroom, I'd show built-ins for storage rather than a closet, and show a wide cased opening rather than a door. In other words, give it specific physical characteristics which would prevent its being defined as a bedroom.

As I've said before, in my world, a bedroom is an asset, a feature, a selling point. From the design side, I WANT to count all the potential bedrooms. That's a major criterion in the way homes, and plans, are bought and sold.

And as Garth says, the overwhelming majority of people have never seen the blueprints of the house they inhabit. It doesn't matter to them how plans are labeled. They decide on usage of rooms based on the looking at the real room in real life -- the same way real estate agents count bedrooms when they're composing the ad.

Providing egress isn't difficult or expensive if it's considered in design. I never encounter home clients who want tiny little undersized windows, or get fighting mad about letting light into their home. In the great majority of plans I've been involved with, every habitable room has an egress-sized window anyway, simply for aesthetic reasons. I double-check all potential bedrooms to make sure of this, but normally it takes care of itself automatically.
 
peach said:
In most jurisdictions, the zoning code is going to prevail.. and I like TJ's ordinance.. if it's not anything else, it's a bedroom... because it can be used as a sleeping room.
Click to expand...
"if it's not anything else", as in, if it is not labeled and "looks" like a bedroom?

Look and see how your building code is adopted, , if locally, there is some hope you can fly with the zoning code definition. If adopted on a State basis thru RSA, there is no chance your zoning code definition will fly.
 
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...
So a walk in closet is a bedroom?
 
High Desert said:
So all of the rooms listed below would be a bedroom?- Living rooms

- Dining rooms

- Toilet rooms (without a bath)

- Office/den

- Game/rec room,and

- any other room that wasn't excluded by the above denfinition
Click to expand...
His ordinance states "in excess of three", meaning you can have living room, dining room, office, kitchen, bathrooms, laundry room, pantry and foyer. Other than that, it would be considered a bedroom. If I understand correctly, that is.
 
"R109.4 Approval required.

Work shall not be done beyond the point indicated in each successive inspection without first obtaining the approval of the building official. The building official upon notification, shall make the requested inspections and shall either indicate the portion of the construction that is satisfactory as completed, or shall notify the permit holder or an agent of the permit holder wherein the same fails to comply with this code. Any portions that do not comply shall be corrected and such portion shall not be covered or concealed until authorized by the building official."

Jobsaver, Several people have asked now it's my turn... What section of 'this code' have I not complied with by having a sewing room or den in my private home? You can't quote one because there is no basis in code for your answer.

Show me in your local law where you have the legal authority to define what I will or will not use a given room in my private home for. You sound like you are sincere about wanting to do a good job, and may not realize the severity of the personal liability you are exposing yourself to. For instance, if I had my plans denied by your office, or you attempted to force/coerce me into modifying my plans to suit your personal opinion, I would print out this very thread as evidence in my federal civil rights lawsuit against you and your municipality. Your municipality would likely have their case dismissed, unless they are aware of your misfeasance and do nothing to correct it. You however will have a hard time proving your case without the force of law behind your requirement.

quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by JBI

Play nice boys... There is no code based arguement for relabeling of interior rooms or spaces by the AHJ.

"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.... "

righter, you are seriously grasping at straws. That section does not apply in this case, first of all it is a Res Code issue, not IBC, second 1004.1.1 is for calculating occupant load:

"1004.1.1 Areas without fixed seating. The number of occupants shall be computed at the rate of one occupant per unit of area as prescribed in Table 1004.1.1. For areas without fixed seating, the occupant load shall not be less than that number determined by dividing the floor area under consideration by the occupant per unit of area factor assigned to the occupancy as set forth in Table 1004.1.1. 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."

How is that relvant to the OP?

TJacobs at least has the force of law with:

"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."

Zoning has the force of law.

As far as the connection between Zoning and Building Code, how about:

"R102.2 Other laws. The provisions of this code shall not be deemed to nullify any provisions of local, state or federal law."

from the 2009 IRC. How's that for a connection?

This is very interesting... so many posts and everyone overlooking the obvious...
 
Also from our zoning code:

21.3 Definitions:

ZONING ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: The Zoning Enforcement Officer shall be the Building Commissioner and shall enforce this Chapter.

21.4(F):

F. PERMITS. No application for a building permit or other permit or license or for a certificate of occupancy, shall be approved by the Building Commissioner, and no permit or license shall be issued by any other Village department, which would authorize the use or change in use of any land or building contrary to the provisions of this Chapter, or the erection, moving, alteration, enlargement or occupancy of any building designed or intended to be used for a purpose or in a manner contrary to the provisions of this Chapter. That site construction, utility installation and grading shall not commence until a Site Development Permit has been issued by the Village and all offsite and onsite utilities serving the subject property shall be underground, and water and sanitary sewer permits have been issued by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency.

2006 IRC:

R106.1.1 Information on construction documents.

Construction documents shall be drawn upon suitable material. Electronic media documents are permitted to be submitted when approved by the building official. Construction documents shall be of sufficient clarity to indicate the location, nature and extent of the work proposed and show in detail that it will conform to the provisions of this code and relevant laws, ordinances, rules and regulations, as determined by the building official.

----------------------------------------------------------------

FWIW, I had nothing to do with writing the provisions into the zoning code. I just bothered to read them and apply them, because that's what they pay me to do. Your mileage may vary.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top