We have an application for a church remodel. The tenants are proposing to add partition walls to create class rooms in an existing church building. However, one of the rooms has a shower and sink, the layout looks "residential" and the applicant made the comment that it may be used by an evangelist from time to time for residential purposes. However, she changed her mind after the secretary notified her of some of the municipal and fire code requirements for residential use in a commercial zone. However the floor plan remains the same. Is there a way to prevent the applicant from installing a shower, etc?
-
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.
Looks like a duck, walks like a duck...
- Thread starter benny
- Start date
steveray
SAWHORSE
They are allowed to lie, document, document, document!
Coug Dad
Platinum Member
I have slept in many a chuch as a sponsor on youth trips or mission trips. Those churches did not have "residential" protection. Do you really want to pick this battle to fight. Like Steveray say, document and move on.
Papio Bldg Dept
REGISTERED
If it helps you sleep better at night, you may need to formalize your concerns to the applicant/church. Is there an RDP involved? I think there is a way you can sufficiently present your concerns/recommendations for potential uses of the space without "ducking" the issue altogether and avoiding a fight you probably won't win. I think it was mentioned in a previous thread that appealing to the church's responsibility to serve as a good shepherd is often a successful way to get their attention. Good luck.
Just tell them... You are lying! I know you are lying.....I don't like you AND I never will!
Just kidding.......That's what you want to say but unfortunately or fortunately, depends on how you look at it, you can't do that!
As others said ...document and move on! Sometimes it not worth the battle. Especially when politics and religion are involved!
Good luck with it!
Just kidding.......That's what you want to say but unfortunately or fortunately, depends on how you look at it, you can't do that!
As others said ...document and move on! Sometimes it not worth the battle. Especially when politics and religion are involved!
Good luck with it!
fatboy
Administrator
I'll pile on also, agree with others, document your concerns in writing, copy to file, copy in your posession. Move on to fight a battle you can come out on top of.
mtlogcabin
SAWHORSE
2009 IBC
SLEEPING UNIT. A room or space in which people sleep, which can also include permanent provisions for living, eating, and either sanitation or kitchen facilities but not both. Such rooms and spaces that are also part of a dwelling unit are not sleeping units.
Does not matter if there is a shower or sink or not. If someone sleeps anywhere at anytime for any length of time you may have a sleeping unit.
The definition is all to inclusive as we have discussed here before, and under a literal interpretation would apply to just about every room someone fell asleep in.
SLEEPING UNIT. A room or space in which people sleep, which can also include permanent provisions for living, eating, and either sanitation or kitchen facilities but not both. Such rooms and spaces that are also part of a dwelling unit are not sleeping units.
Does not matter if there is a shower or sink or not. If someone sleeps anywhere at anytime for any length of time you may have a sleeping unit.
The definition is all to inclusive as we have discussed here before, and under a literal interpretation would apply to just about every room someone fell asleep in.
Along with other documentation you may have, I would also suggest alnguage on the face of the "Certificate of Occupancy" to the effect that the premises are not approved for overnight or sleeping accommodations.
I am sad to say that some of the best (worst) liars I have seen have had church affiliations.
I am sad to say that some of the best (worst) liars I have seen have had church affiliations.
fatboy
Administrator
"I am sad to say that some of the best (worst) liars I have seen have had church affiliations."
Yup, sad but true.......We groan out loud everytime there is a church inquiry or permit app.
Yup, sad but true.......We groan out loud everytime there is a church inquiry or permit app.
I groan along with you all, we just want to do our job;
but the reality is that we would not have had this nation as bankrupt of (insert "here_________" whatever may seem to fit you're personal bill), if people of a religious persuasion had not felt repressed by the government.
but the reality is that we would not have had this nation as bankrupt of (insert "here_________" whatever may seem to fit you're personal bill), if people of a religious persuasion had not felt repressed by the government.
Playing devil's advocate: I've seen many, many office buildings and other workplaces with showers and sinks--why would this be any different? Has anyone ever got trapped by weather in their office and had to stay overnight? Do we force gymnasiums or other buildings to comply with residential criteria when they are used as temporary shelters?
I don't think we have to be too critical on this particular application, unless it is planned to be a regular occurance and the room really will be a sleeping unit.
I don't think we have to be too critical on this particular application, unless it is planned to be a regular occurance and the room really will be a sleeping unit.
north star
MODERATOR
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2009
- Messages
- 4,596
$ $
benny,
I will "go against the flow" on here and say fight it,
until your "powers-that-be" say to stop fighting it!
Just because it is a church does not make it right,
regardless of the intentions or good will or
[ potential ] for lying or bad shepherding of the
flock, or anything else..........Pursue this project
as vigorously as you are allowed to......And "yes",
by all means, ...document, document, document and
then document some more..........Also, I agree with
"Big Mac' idea of clarifying the Occ. Group &
Use wording onto the Certificate of Occupancy.
IMO, turning a blind eye to this sets a bad
precedence!.....Unfortunately, when you give
some an inch, they tend to want to come back
for the "full mile" later.
Now, if you are asking if you will win this, I
will say "probably not", however, I DO think
that it is important to take a positive / moral /
code based stand and to voice your concerns.
$ $
benny,
I will "go against the flow" on here and say fight it,
until your "powers-that-be" say to stop fighting it!
Just because it is a church does not make it right,
regardless of the intentions or good will or
[ potential ] for lying or bad shepherding of the
flock, or anything else..........Pursue this project
as vigorously as you are allowed to......And "yes",
by all means, ...document, document, document and
then document some more..........Also, I agree with
"Big Mac' idea of clarifying the Occ. Group &
Use wording onto the Certificate of Occupancy.
IMO, turning a blind eye to this sets a bad
precedence!.....Unfortunately, when you give
some an inch, they tend to want to come back
for the "full mile" later.
Now, if you are asking if you will win this, I
will say "probably not", however, I DO think
that it is important to take a positive / moral /
code based stand and to voice your concerns.
$ $
Last edited by a moderator:
FM William Burns
REGISTERED
Funny....well not really.
Just saw this one and just got done with another CYA regarding the homeless sleeping in churches. Shuks...I see it's about 4:00 and time to head to gym. I'll return later but have to leave you with a little cliffhanger. I think you'll like the experience in documentation
Just saw this one and just got done with another CYA regarding the homeless sleeping in churches. Shuks...I see it's about 4:00 and time to head to gym. I'll return later but have to leave you with a little cliffhanger. I think you'll like the experience in documentation
A sink and shower does not a sleeping unit make. Be sure the applicant clearly identifies what the intended uses of each space will be on the plan set and move on.
And look on the bright side... When they come knockig at your door next summer on a warm evening with any luck they wont stink or have teeth rotting out of their heads!
ZIG
And look on the bright side... When they come knockig at your door next summer on a warm evening with any luck they wont stink or have teeth rotting out of their heads!
ZIG
righter101
Gold Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2009
- Messages
- 604
Extortion or threats of violence are often effective as well.Mule said:
FM William Burns
REGISTERED
Ok the rest of the story. Years ago we were asked to approve the lodging of homeless people in churches. The process was an outreach effort of a local group soliciting local churches to put the homeless groups up for a week at a time at host churches. The fire department met with city officials and explained with documentation and references the hazard associated with people not intimate with their surroundings lodging and sleeping in the church structures.
We were asked by management to come up with a solution for approval in lieu of requiring sprinklers. Hardwire inter-connected smoke detection and mandatory adult supervision of a minimum of two people would be required at all times the occupants were asleep. The city allowed single station detection. We documented our position that the buildings did not meet code and that the jurisdiction permitted a modification as were directed. I filed the records and moved on.
Now the recent events; last week my own church was propositioned so I asked some additional questions of the task group regarding how many they thought would volunteer to remain awake overnight supervising the lodgers. I was informed that the group decided to relax the conditions placed on them by the FD and they where allowing their supervisors to sleep along side (separate rooms) with the occupants.
I opposed the motion and requested a copy of the minutes for my records and informed the task group that I would address the new information regarding the lack in supervision with department staff the following week. Needless to say I could not locate some of the documentation in the official files so I copied my personal stash and met with department staff.
We verified and confirmed with the hosting group that they were indeed allowing their hosting church volunteers to sleep and we replied; that violated the conditions of the city agreement and we would be revising our position on the matter. They replied that they would not be able to get volunteers if they had to stay awake and alert for emergencies. We offered some alternatives for them to consider like hotels or making one church area code compliant. Well I’m awaiting the paper cuts but have it all well documented. I will just request allowances in writing and file. I won’t support my church if they decide to involve themselves especially after I explained the risk and exposure.
End of Story.
Forgot…..moral to story, don’t get upset or loose sleep (no pun) over being sidelined by bureaucracy, just keep good records in the event you’ll need them later.
We were asked by management to come up with a solution for approval in lieu of requiring sprinklers. Hardwire inter-connected smoke detection and mandatory adult supervision of a minimum of two people would be required at all times the occupants were asleep. The city allowed single station detection. We documented our position that the buildings did not meet code and that the jurisdiction permitted a modification as were directed. I filed the records and moved on.
Now the recent events; last week my own church was propositioned so I asked some additional questions of the task group regarding how many they thought would volunteer to remain awake overnight supervising the lodgers. I was informed that the group decided to relax the conditions placed on them by the FD and they where allowing their supervisors to sleep along side (separate rooms) with the occupants.
I opposed the motion and requested a copy of the minutes for my records and informed the task group that I would address the new information regarding the lack in supervision with department staff the following week. Needless to say I could not locate some of the documentation in the official files so I copied my personal stash and met with department staff.
We verified and confirmed with the hosting group that they were indeed allowing their hosting church volunteers to sleep and we replied; that violated the conditions of the city agreement and we would be revising our position on the matter. They replied that they would not be able to get volunteers if they had to stay awake and alert for emergencies. We offered some alternatives for them to consider like hotels or making one church area code compliant. Well I’m awaiting the paper cuts but have it all well documented. I will just request allowances in writing and file. I won’t support my church if they decide to involve themselves especially after I explained the risk and exposure.
End of Story.
Forgot…..moral to story, don’t get upset or loose sleep (no pun) over being sidelined by bureaucracy, just keep good records in the event you’ll need them later.
Last edited by a moderator:
pyrguy
REGISTERED
I had a church in the office telling me that "God will protect us" and we just needed to not enforce the code requirements for their addition. Was going to cost some $$$ to comply if I remember correctly.
I asked the pastor if he could remember the book of Romans Chapter 13. They complied.
I asked the pastor if he could remember the book of Romans Chapter 13. They complied.
Frank
REGISTERED
Remember RLUIPA
(a) Substantial Burdens.--
(1) General rule.--No government shall impose or implement a
land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial
burden on the religious exercise of a person, including a
religious assembly or institution, unless the government
demonstrates that imposition of the burden on that person,
assembly, or institution--
(A) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental
interest; and
(B) is the least restrictive means of furthering
that compelling governmental interest.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-106publ274/html/PLAW-106publ274.htm
A Building safety is a compelling govenment interest
but
B means we have to work real hard to give religious institutions what they want with minimal trouble and expense
(a) Substantial Burdens.--
(1) General rule.--No government shall impose or implement a
land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial
burden on the religious exercise of a person, including a
religious assembly or institution, unless the government
demonstrates that imposition of the burden on that person,
assembly, or institution--
(A) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental
interest; and
(B) is the least restrictive means of furthering
that compelling governmental interest.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-106publ274/html/PLAW-106publ274.htm
A Building safety is a compelling govenment interest
but
B means we have to work real hard to give religious institutions what they want with minimal trouble and expense
