Certificate of Occupancy Q.

[SCBO1]

Issued a commercial building permit to an owner and the owner sold the property. The building code section 111.2 wants the name of the owner or owner's agent on the CO.

Does the CO need the original agent/contractor/owner or can the new owner be inserted on the CO?

Does anyone follow the sec 111.2 list of items that need to be on the CO?

On an A-occupancy or E-occupancy do you issue a room occupancy limit on a separate document for display?

 

[steveray]

We change the owners name if it changes during construction...Yes....No on the rooms, they have to post it themselves...

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

IBC 2021:

1004.9 Posting of occupant load. Every room or space that
is an assembly occupancy shall have the occupant load of
the room or space posted in a conspicuous place, near the
main exit or exit access doorway from the room or space, for
the intended configurations. Posted signs shall be of an
approved legible permanent design and shall be maintained
by the owner or the owner’s authorized agent.

For owner on the CofO, we look up the current owner on the assessor's web site and use whoever the assessor lists as the owner.

 

[ICE]

Many jurisdictions will issue a permit to an owner with a stipulation that the property cannot be sold for a specified period of time.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Many jurisdictions will issue a permit to an owner with a stipulation that the property cannot be sold for a specified period of time.

I very seriously doubt the legality of that condition. The building code (and the enabling statutes, in my state) do not provide any authority for a building official to in any way restrict an owner's liberty to sell his/her/its property.

 

[ICE]

I very seriously doubt the legality of that condition.

I had an English teacher that would toss out any homework that had the "very"... but I'm gonna read your post anyway.

Who is eligible to obtain a permit is not addressed in California building codes. The conditions under which a permit is granted are determined by the AHJ. The CSLB leaves it up to the jurisdiction to set the rules.

 

[mtlogcabin]

Owner/builders had to keep a home for at least one year when I was in Florida, or they were in violation of the contractor licensing laws at the time.
Section 489.103(7), Florida Statutes, states that the licensing provisions of Part I, Chapter 489, Florida Statutes, do not apply to:

"Owners of property when acting as their own contractor and providing all material supervision themselves, when building or improving farm outbuildings or one-family or two-family residences on such property for the occupancy or use of such owners and not offered for sale or lease, or building or improving commercial buildings at a cost of under $25,000 on such property for the occupancy or use of such owners and not offered for sale or lease. In an action brought under this part, proof of the sale or lease, or offering for sale or lease, of any such structure by the owner-builder within 1 year after completion of same creates a presumption that the construction was undertaken for purposes of sale or lease. This subsection does not exempt any person who is employed by such owner and who acts in the capacity of a contractor."

 

[ICE]

offering for sale or lease, of any such structure by the owner-builder within 1 year after completion of same creates a presumption that the construction was undertaken for purposes of sale or lease.

LA County has a similar requirement. The owner signs a paragraph under the penalty of perjury that the owner has lived at the property for a minimum of one year and will not offer the property for sale for one year. I am not aware of the rule having ever been enforced. I have found plenty of for sale signs when I show up for an inspection.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Every house flipper claims they're going to live in the house when they take out a permit without being registered as a home improvement contractor.

 

[Penguin87]

Many jurisdictions will issue a permit to an owner with a stipulation that the property cannot be sold for a specified period of time.

Thats crazy. There are developers here who specialize in prepping a piece of land for development: demo, pulling building and other permits, getting everything through design review. Then they sell to a developer who actually builds from the permits already issued.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Thats crazy. There are developers here who specialize in prepping a piece of land for development: demo, pulling building and other permits, getting everything through design review. Then they sell to a developer who actually builds from the permits already issued.

That can't happen in our state. A building permit is issued to a specific entity or person. It goes to the person or the entity, not to the land. The permit can't be bought or sold.

 

[SCBO1]

I was at a restaurant that had several different dining areas, each was posted with an occupant load, I noticed they had the room name/number on it. I believe that matches the Architects room number assigned on the plans. It also had the code edition and use group listed; suppose you could put whatever you wanted on the OL for a room placard. However, the certificate of occupancy would have the designed load for the building or tenant space.

 

[Sifu]

Does anyone follow the sec 111.2 list of items that need to be on the CO?

I have yet to find one. All have some of the information, never all of it, and I find a lot that aren't accurate. In most AHJ's I have dealt with, it is generated by the intake information, which is almost always wrong. Some are even signed by the CBO, which baffles me. I wouldn't sign my name to anything without verification of what I am signing. I have worked for a couple where even the CBO signature is computer generated. In my experience, this particular administrative provision is a mess in the real world.

 

[Mark K]

The building code is to assure that the completed building satisfies certain requirements. If the certificate of occupancy was tied to a specific individual this would create difficulties in selling of the property.

Let us assume that an CO was issued to an individual and then the building was sold several times. Then later it is determined that changes were made that were inconsistent with the original CO. Does the jurisdiction require the original owner, who may no longer be alive, correct the property?

The only thing that makes sense is that the permit and the CO are issued with respect to the property. Thus it is the responsibility of the current owner to comply with the laws relevant to the property.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Does anyone follow the sec 111.2 list of items that need to be on the CO?

Yes, we do.

If not, what's the point? Some years ago I was asked to evaluate the code implications of adding an additional 50,000 s.f. of factory to a building that had a 50,000 s.f. factory and an attached 10,000 s.f office area. The certificate of occupancy listed the occupancy as "Commercial."

Not helpful.

 

[mtlogcabin]

On an A-occupancy or E-occupancy do you issue a room occupancy limit on a separate document for display?

Yes, we provide the document. If it is a large dividable conference room like in a hotel, we provide one for each space/room plus one for the entire space/room.

 

[jar546]

The building code is to assure that the completed building satisfies certain requirements. If the certificate of occupancy was tied to a specific individual this would create difficulties in selling of the property.

Let us assume that an CO was issued to an individual and then the building was sold several times. Then later it is determined that changes were made that were inconsistent with the original CO. Does the jurisdiction require the original owner, who may no longer be alive, correct the property?

The only thing that makes sense is that the permit and the CO are issued with respect to the property. Thus it is the responsibility of the current owner to comply with the laws relevant to the property.

The CO is issued to the property, but the name of the owner is listed at the time of issuance (SFR for example). The CO is uploaded to the county tax assessor's office, and the CO is always attached to the parcel regardless of who owns the property. It is a little different when a CO is issued to a business because it could be a tenant of a part of a parcel. In this case, although the CO is attached to the specific property address, it has the business's name on it. Many businesses, such as hair salons, for example, need the CO in their name in order to secure their operating license with the state.

 

[jar546]

What is required on a CO per State Statute:

[A] 111.2 Certificate issued. After the building official inspects the building or structure and does not find violations of the provisions of this code or other laws that are enforced by the department of building safety, the building official shall issue a certificate of occupancy that contains the following:
1. The building permit number.
2. The address of the structure.
3. The name and address of the owner or the owner’s authorized agent.
4. A description of that portion of the structure for which the certificate is issued.
5. A statement that the described portion of the structure has been inspected for compliance with the requirements of this code for the occupancy and division of occupancy and the use for which the proposed occupancy is classified.
6. For buildings and structures in flood hazard areas, a statement that documentation of the as-built lowest floor elevation has been provided and is retained in the records of the building official.
7. The name of the building official.
8. The edition of the code under which the permit was issued.
9. The use and occupancy, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 3.
10. The type of construction as defined in Chapter 6.
11. The design occupant load.
12. If an automatic sprinkler system is provided, whether the sprinkler system is required.
13. Any special stipulations and conditions of the building permit.

 

[Sifu]

Yes, we do.

If not, what's the point? Some years ago I was asked to evaluate the code implications of adding an additional 50,000 s.f. of factory to a building that had a 50,000 s.f. factory and an attached 10,000 s.f office area. The certificate of occupancy listed the occupancy as "Commercial."

Not helpful.

That's the kind of thing I see!

 

[mtlogcabin]

They did not require a lot on the CO in the legacy codes. There also were no "F" or "S" classifications.

1982 UBC

 

[CASpAccess]

Many jurisdictions will issue a permit to an owner with a stipulation that the property cannot be sold for a specified period of time.

Imposing a condition of a CO on duration of ownership should be carefully reviewed by legal counsel for the agency issuing the CO. If such a provision has not been ratified in the municipal code within the jurisdiction of the issuing agency it could easily be invalidated and the offending condition be rendered unenforceable. If the conditions imposed on a CO lack due process of ratification in accordance with state and federal Administrative Procedures Acts, these would be determined unenorceable.

I'm not an attorney, however, as a subject matter expert working on behalf of many jurisdictions here in California, I have witnessed well intentioned permit conditions being challenged and overturned due to the lack of proper due process ratification. Relative to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy, these administrative procedures are extensions of the ministerial duties enumerated in the state adopted building code. As such, if the Applicant has fulfilled its obligations and demonstrated compliance as qualification for issuance of the Certificate, the Certificate runs with the land (not the title or deed to the property). If any owner (current or future) allows or contributes to a code violation or failure to uphold a condition enumerated in the Certificate of Occupancy, then for good cause the AHJ could suspend or revoke a CO.

 

[ICE]

Imposing a condition of a CO on duration of ownership should be carefully reviewed by legal counsel for the agency issuing the CO.

My experience with that was mostly in Los Angeles County. The Board of Supervisors created the ordinance but rest assured the Supervisors would be upset if the ordinance was enforced.