earshavewalls
Bronze Member
I posted this topic on the "New ICC Communities of Interest". There are a whole 10 people signed up for this "Community", so I got a really dumb response to this. I am pasting the exact post along with my response to the response. We are still wrestling with this issue and would like some opinions, insights, or anything really. We strive to be consistent and fair, but sometimes it can go too far in one way or the other.....so, here they are:
Original post:
We have a project in plan check with an interesting proposition. The applicant feels that the processing equipment within the bottling facility that is being installed as a part of the permit is exempt from inclusion in the valuation to determine the level of accessibility upgrades that they will need to provide. Our valuation (surprisingly the same as theirs was originally) is at $300,000, meaning that full compliance will be required for all accessible features on the path of travel to the location of alterations and improvements.
There is no real guidance in the California Code, Section 1134B as to what equipment must become a part of the valuation relative to this issue. Is it just equipment directly related to the usability of the building (service gear, HVAC units, plumbing fixtures, light fixtures, etc.) or is all equipment that will be attached to the structure and connected to one or more of the utilities included?
This has led to discussions on what equipment IS to be included in project valuations. Do you include the spray booth value for a Body Shop? Do you include a printing press for a Newspaper? Do you include cooking appliances in a restaurant? What about walk-in coolers and freezers?
The other issue is the three-year period for aggregate amount of improvements. When does this time frame start? At the original submittal or at issuance of permit or at final? Where does it end, or cutoff? We have just recently decided (for now) to use the submittal dates, since these are the only firm date available. But this could be argued on the present end and pushed to final, since this is when final payment is made........it could get a little litigious, if you see what I mean, especially if the improvements are substantial.
I posted a similar thread the day before the ICC closed the old site, so I was unable to see if any responses came up.
Second post:
As we see it, items such as a spray booth, walk-in cooler/freezer, kitchen exhaust hood systems, grease interceptors, etc.
Right now, a bottling company is replacing much of their assembly line equipment as well as adding two new boilers, a large chiller and all of the associated accessories as well as sumps and tanks to hold the processed waters. They claim that all of this equipment is only for their manufacturing process and is not a part of the essential services to the building and as such are exempt from the valuation.
We do not completely agree. It is our stance that the boilers and chiller and all associated equipment essential for the operation of those appliances ARE a part of the valuation. We are allowing them to not include packaging equipment, palletizing equipment, conveyors, and other equipment that is used only to package the beverages.
Personally, I feel that ALL equipment that is to be permanently connected to the building electrical, water, sewer, or other system should be included. Portable equipment or cord-and-plug equipment should be exempt. This mirrors the criteria used by OSHPD as far as hospital valuations and makes more sense to me.
Our building official feels that processing equipment that is not part of an essential service be exempt from valuation, but he wants to include spray booths and the other items mentioned earlier.
That, my friend, is our dilemna.
Original post:
We have a project in plan check with an interesting proposition. The applicant feels that the processing equipment within the bottling facility that is being installed as a part of the permit is exempt from inclusion in the valuation to determine the level of accessibility upgrades that they will need to provide. Our valuation (surprisingly the same as theirs was originally) is at $300,000, meaning that full compliance will be required for all accessible features on the path of travel to the location of alterations and improvements.
There is no real guidance in the California Code, Section 1134B as to what equipment must become a part of the valuation relative to this issue. Is it just equipment directly related to the usability of the building (service gear, HVAC units, plumbing fixtures, light fixtures, etc.) or is all equipment that will be attached to the structure and connected to one or more of the utilities included?
This has led to discussions on what equipment IS to be included in project valuations. Do you include the spray booth value for a Body Shop? Do you include a printing press for a Newspaper? Do you include cooking appliances in a restaurant? What about walk-in coolers and freezers?
The other issue is the three-year period for aggregate amount of improvements. When does this time frame start? At the original submittal or at issuance of permit or at final? Where does it end, or cutoff? We have just recently decided (for now) to use the submittal dates, since these are the only firm date available. But this could be argued on the present end and pushed to final, since this is when final payment is made........it could get a little litigious, if you see what I mean, especially if the improvements are substantial.
I posted a similar thread the day before the ICC closed the old site, so I was unable to see if any responses came up.
Second post:
As we see it, items such as a spray booth, walk-in cooler/freezer, kitchen exhaust hood systems, grease interceptors, etc.
Right now, a bottling company is replacing much of their assembly line equipment as well as adding two new boilers, a large chiller and all of the associated accessories as well as sumps and tanks to hold the processed waters. They claim that all of this equipment is only for their manufacturing process and is not a part of the essential services to the building and as such are exempt from the valuation.
We do not completely agree. It is our stance that the boilers and chiller and all associated equipment essential for the operation of those appliances ARE a part of the valuation. We are allowing them to not include packaging equipment, palletizing equipment, conveyors, and other equipment that is used only to package the beverages.
Personally, I feel that ALL equipment that is to be permanently connected to the building electrical, water, sewer, or other system should be included. Portable equipment or cord-and-plug equipment should be exempt. This mirrors the criteria used by OSHPD as far as hospital valuations and makes more sense to me.
Our building official feels that processing equipment that is not part of an essential service be exempt from valuation, but he wants to include spray booths and the other items mentioned earlier.
That, my friend, is our dilemna.