Ordinances versus state code

[Eliza]

I recently posted about the definition of a habitable room, and definition of a bedroom. There is a development proposed for an old building on my street, and most of the units have bedrooms with no no windows and only one form of egress.

We have ordinances that state that for a room to be habitable, it has to have a window “facing directly to the outdoors” which I believe was intended to mean it would open to the outdoors. If it only said “facing the outdoors”, I would think it could be an interior window, but when it says “facing directly to the outdoors”, I take it to mean that the window must open to the outdoors.

Apparently there is R–2 zoning for the proposed development. I was told that our ordinances usually would be enforceable if state code conflicted, bit that in this case,the rights to our town ordinances were waived by the town planning and zoning commission.

Does anyone have any knowledge it thoughts about this and whether it is allowed to waive rights to ordinances, how common it is, and whether it could be challenged?

The building is in rRsidence Zone A, which is only for single-family zoning, but the developer has applied for an adaptive redevelopment zone which allows for more density. The development is supposed to take into account the underlying zone, however.

We are wondering what is the point of having town ordinances if your town adopts state code and then doesn’t enforce ordinances.

Thank you!

 

[Genduct]

DOn't know about your zoning issues or local politics, but a life safety drawing under the IBC rules will reflect the travel distances and rated assemblies needed along with the proper alarms and probably sprinkler system will meet the Min Code requirements to keep people safe.

The idea of, having a bedroom without a View, let alone the opportunity to have the fireman throw a ladder up to allow you to get out ( assuming it is within reach of a ladder) sounds questionable

 

[Sifu]

Sounds a lot like spot zoning to me. Usually not legal and lots of lawsuits over similar instances. IMHO ordinances and laws serve to both keep the public in line and provide limitations on the lawmaking entity. I think lawmakers who ignore their own laws are on on seriously shaky ground if someone cares enough to fight. Specific to your situation as I understand it, the life safety issues need to be pointed out very loudly regardless of the legal question. Not sure if it is multistory or sprinklered, or if the one exit you refer to is for the building or the units. I would be asking lots of questions up front. I would seriously question the zoning departments ability to waive a life safety issue.

 

[Mark K]

I believe you will find that the answer varies from state to state.

The ICC publication "legal Aspects of Code Administration" discusses some of the issues.

State law governs and can either give local jurisdictions authority or can limit the authority of the city or county. What does your state constitution and court cases say? Many cities and building departments are not well informed on this area of law which can result in the local ordinance being invalid.

At one time California gave local jurisdictions great flexibility in adopting local building codes but in 1970 the legislature changed the rules where local jurisdictions only have limited authority to modify to state building code. The building department is delegated the job of enforcing the building code but for the most part local jurisdiction cannot change the rules. Thus a zoning ordinance that would attempt to modify the building code would not be legal.

To know the truth, you need to understand what the State constitution and state statutes say. Building code provisions are not a good source.

 

[Paul Sweet]

Some states (including Virginia) adopt a statewide building code and do not allow localities to modify it.

Zoning and building codes are 2 different matters and are usually enforced by different departments. Zoning codes often vary between localities.

 

[Mark K]

Agree authority to adopt zoning and building regulations are based on two different authorities.

 

[Genduct]

I recently posted about the definition of a habitable room, and definition of a bedroom. There is a development proposed for an old building on my street, and most of the units have bedrooms with no no windows and only one form of egress.

We have ordinances that state that for a room to be habitable, it has to have a window “facing directly to the outdoors” which I believe was intended to mean it would open to the outdoors. If it only said “facing the outdoors”, I would think it could be an interior window, but when it says “facing directly to the outdoors”, I take it to mean that the window must open to the outdoors.

Apparently there is R–2 zoning for the proposed development. I was told that our ordinances usually would be enforceable if state code conflicted, bit that in this case,the rights to our town ordinances were waived by the town planning and zoning commission.

Does anyone have any knowledge it thoughts about this and whether it is allowed to waive rights to ordinances, how common it is, and whether it could be challenged?

The building is in rRsidence Zone A, which is only for single-family zoning, but the developer has applied for an adaptive redevelopment zone which allows for more density. The development is supposed to take into account the underlying zone, however.

We are wondering what is the point of having town ordinances if your town adopts state code and then doesn’t enforce ordinances.

Thank you!

I just took another look at your post and would like to add a comment:


My understanding is that the State Code is the MINIMUM and the local jurisdiction had the ability to continue local Code requirements in use BEFORE the adoption of the State Code.
Also the Local AHJ can require compliance with rules that increase the Safety of a Code element but NEVER Allow LESS than the Code Minimum

The Zoning questions for Use and Density are Political / Planning matters but the Zoning elements could be interesting when set backs, distance from Property lines etc run up against Fire distances from abutting or adjacent Properties. THere is an example that could get a little contentious

 

[my250r11]

Also the Local AHJ can require compliance with rules that increase the Safety of a Code element but NEVER Allow LESS than the Code Minimum

Agree with this 100%. That is how it is here. You can be more strict but ABSOLUTLY CAN NOT BE LESS THAN what is required by the State Code adopted.

 

[Yikes]

My understanding is that the State Code is the MINIMUM and the local jurisdiction had the ability to continue local Code requirements in use BEFORE the adoption of the State Code.
Also the Local AHJ can require compliance with rules that increase the Safety of a Code element but NEVER Allow LESS than the Code Minimum

Out here in California, any changes to the state-adopted building code must be submitted to the state for approval as part of the local adoption process (CBC 1.8.6). An AHJ cannot change the code, including creating rules that increase the restrictiveness of any prescriptive code minimums, without first going through that process - - and the CBSC has veto power on proposed amendments.
An AHJ does have the authority to interpret the approved prescriptive code as it applies to specific plans submitted for approval.
A fire district has authority increase some prescriptive code minimums.
A zoning code can also affect building design, through other mechanisms.




Lastly, under specific conditions a building official can approve alternate designs that are less than the prescriptive code minimum, if it can be demonstrated that the final design meet the underlying intent of the code in terms of quality, strength, effectiveness, fire resistance, durability and safety (CBC 104.11).

 

[Genduct]

Out here in California, any changes to the state-adopted building code must be submitted to the state for approval as part of the local adoption process (CBC 1.8.6). An AHJ cannot change the code, including creating rules that increase the restrictiveness of any prescriptive code minimums, without first going through that process - - and the CBSC has veto power on proposed amendments.
An AHJ does have the authority to interpret the approved prescriptive code as it applies to specific plans submitted for approval.
A fire district has authority increase some prescriptive code minimums.
A zoning code can also affect building design, through other mechanisms.

View attachment 8597
View attachment 8598

Lastly, under specific conditions a building official can approve alternate designs that are less than the prescriptive code minimum, if it can be demonstrated that the final design meet the underlying intent of the code in terms of quality,oke strpength, effectiveness, fire resistance, durability and safety (CBC 104.11).

Thanks Yikes
I agree with your comment. I may have misspoken
I was thinking about How our State PA adopts the ICC as the Base Code and Locals can continue other requirements and I am sure can adopt future amendments that can be ,more restrictive ( assumed to be safer) than the Base ( I believe you'll agree Minimum ) ICC Code.
Certainly, the Owner looks to their design Professionals to insist on Specs that will optimize and deliver a Good Job or even Best Practices
In addition, I believe you'll agree, as the Code Official we have the responsibility and hence the authority to discern the Intent of the Code when it is not clear.
Of course here is where some interesting conversations can begin if the Applicant doesn't agree. There are review mechanisms in place in Harrisburg, if applicant believes we've been overzealous
Probably the same with you