Uncertified Buildings in PA

[rooster]

I'm new here. I was just directed here from another forum. And I'm glad. Looks like an informative place.

I was wondering if anybody has gone through the process of getting a building certified in PA. No design work or nothin'. The owner has been doing mech/energy upgrades and found that 7 buildings in the complex are uncertified.

This is where we came in. We thought it might go something like this:

1. we do field surveys of existing buildings and also survey existing drawings.

2. After assigning construction types, occupancies, etc to the building we would submit to L&I. (Also all the requirements of UCC 403.28)

3. An inspector would go in and cite what he believed to be hazards to life safety.

4. There may be a design project to bring the buildings up to an acceptable level of safety.

Unfortunately, I believe we were wrong on this. The comments we just got back from L&I are treating this as a new building and it must comply to the 2009 IBC in terms of egress. The buildings are old enough to be exempt from sprinklers and accessibility issues. But trying to bring a 1920's building up to current code is not at all a small deal. Stairs may need replaced...entire stairwells may need to be torn down and rebuilt because they aren't wide enough. A room in a basement may need another exit...so bring out the backhoe. 32" doors need to be widened along with narrow corridors. It could go on and on.

So my question is, has anyone gone through this process before? Please don't get the impression we are trying to neglect life safety. That's not it. We are instead trying to get a hold of the process. If we have to up the scope of work up to design to address these issues right now, OK...although a feasibility study may be in order first.

Also, if this were a new building, wouldn't we go through it in a similar way. If an inspector goes through a new building and sees a 32" door, he's just going to say, change that door. He doesn't care what the drawings say. In our case we have buildings that are standing that need inspected...no matter what size the door in our drawings are.

Thanks for reading this rambling post.

 

[jar546]

Is the municipality opt-in or opt-out? L&I only has jurisdiction in opt-out municipalities. If you let me know which, then I can direct you to the correct answer.

 

[jar546]

(b) applies to opt-out communities under L&I (very few, <10%)

© applies to all others that are opt-in

§ 403.28. Uncertified buildings.

(a) Under section 902(b)(6) of the act (35 P. S. § 7210.902(b)(6)), an uncertified building that was built before April 27, 1927, is deemed to be legally occupied until the owner proposes to renovate, add an addition, alter or change the occupancy of the building. The renovation, addition, alteration or change in occupancy must comply with the Uniform Construction Code.

(b) Under section 902(b) of the act, uncertified buildings within the Department’s jurisdiction must meet the following requirements which do not apply to uncertified buildings under subsection (a): (1) Maximum story height, minimum allowable construction type based on floor area, vertical opening and shaft protection requirements, means of egress requirements pertaining to minimum number of exits, maximum travel distances to exits, means of egress illumination, minimum egress widths and heights for exit doors, exit stairs, exit ramps and exit corridors requirements under the ‘International Building Code."



(2) Fire safety requirements in the "International Building Code" for fire alarms, fire extinguishers, heat and smoke detectors, automatic sprinkler systems and occupancy and incidental use separations. The following also apply:



(i) If construction began on a building before May 19, 1984, the installation of automatic sprinkler systems is not required.



(ii) If construction began on a building after May 19, 1984, automatic sprinklers are only required if the building is classified in use groups E (educational), H (high-hazard), I (institutional), or R-1 or R-2 (residential) or if the building has occupied floors more than 75 feet above lowest level of fire department access. Buildings in use groups R-1 and R-2 which do not have occupied floors more than 75 feet above lowest level of fire department access may, instead of installing automatic sprinkler systems, install hard-wired interconnected heat and smoke detectors in all rooms or spaces, whether they are occupied or unoccupied.



(iii) If construction of a building began after May 18, 1984, automatic sprinkler installation shall be completed by December 22, 2010, or any certificate of occupancy issued shall be invalid.



(3) Accessibility requirements are applicable as follows:



(i) If construction of an uncertified building began before September 1, 1965, accessibility requirements will not be imposed by the Department.



(ii) If construction of a building began after August 31, 1965, and before February 18, 1989, and if the building is a State-owned building, a restaurant or a retail commercial establishment, the building must have at least one accessible main entrance, an accessible route from the accessible entrance to any public spaces on the same level as the accessible entrance and, if toilet rooms are provided, the building must have at least one toilet room for each sex or a unisex toilet room complying with the accessibility requirements of the "International Building Code."



(iii) If construction of the building began after February 17, 1989, all accessibility requirements of the "International Building Code" shall be met.



(4) Structural requirements will not be imposed unless the Department determines that the building or a portion of the building has defects that are defined as dangerous in section 202 of the "International Existing Building Code." If the building is dangerous, the Department may impose only those requirements minimally necessary to remove danger to the building’s occupants.



(5) A construction code official may deny the issuance of a certificate of occupancy if the official deems that a building is unsafe because of inadequate means of egress, inadequate lighting and ventilation, fire hazards or other dangers to human life or to public welfare. © The following apply to uncertified buildings where the Department does not have jurisdiction and which are not governed under subsection (a):

(1) A construction code official shall issue a certificate of occupancy to an uncertified building if it meets the requirements of the latest version of the "International Existing Building Code" or Chapter 34 of the "International Building Code." The construction code official shall utilize the code for the municipality which best applies, in the official’s professional judgment.

(2) A construction code official may deny the issuance of a certificate of occupancy if the official deems that a building is unsafe because of inadequate means of egress, inadequate lighting and ventilation, fire hazards or other dangers to human life or to public welfare.

(3) A municipality governed under this subsection may utilize the standards of subsection (b) for the issuance of certificates of occupancy to uncertified buildings if the municipality adopts an ordinance.

 

[rooster]

Ok, thanks for the info. You'll have to forgive me...I don't know if they are opt-in or opt-out. My boss is the one in charge and probably does know this...Since they are a state agency I have a feeling they may be in the 10%. I wasn't a part of the early details of the project, but I can only assume right now that they are a part of the 10% since from the beginning I've been directed to the blue letters you referred to. I just took it for granted. I'll have to ask my boss.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

I only make them go through this if they are doing a change of occupancy.

 

[rooster]

We've actually now been directed to go through a variance process. We're going through the buildings and flagging where they do not comply with IBC 2009 in terms of egress. So far the big things are actually little things. Stair risers and treads, handrails, vestibule depths. Basically all the things where the standards were accepted 50 years ago, but today don't fly. The killer is that there are other buildings on the property built at the same time with the same standards with occupancy permits that are going ahead with the mech. updates with no problems whatsoever. I'm beginning to feel like a hamster.

 

[jar546]

I only make them go through this if they are doing a change of occupancy.

Call Jon Balson at L&I and talk to him about buildings that are not certified. He will enlighten you and change your mind.

 

[Examiner]

So does PA not use the Existing Building's Chapter of the Code. If it is a Historic building you may not have much of anything to do.

 

[rooster]

So does PA not use the Existing Building's Chapter of the Code. If it is a Historic building you may not have much of anything to do.

What's driving everything right now is the fact that the buildings are uncertified. They never had CO's. If you see jar546's post above, you'll see in blue where and how we have to comply.

 

[Architect1281]

Very Orwellian of PA dontcha think Jar

RI had similar "grandfather" codes for older construction 1939, 1952, 1977, NO 1984 though.

our building codes were never retroactive on adoption so my library of old codes was always open

After our much publicised Station Night Club Disaster the Fire code not the Building code came in and

offed everybodys grandfather (Feb 2004) All structures from then on must meet the minimums of the

2003 NFPA 1 and 101 Existing Use Articles. No Certifications just tons of violations / Non Conformance issues

we have and had a co request by owner if no outstanding violation of building and fire after an inspection

by each to determine hazards and safety issues - so building codes go back to when built if in continuous use

but fire My oh My and off to the races with upgrades even on older properties with prior waiver of variance cause those were extinguished too.

Actually a long overdue update but the impact in many instances is a major hit.

I like the approach that PA uses by the documentation of all.