New Code Enacted after Permit issuance but prior to construction
Hi! I came across this question in my practice quiz but not sure where to find the answer so as well post it here: after a drawing set has gone through the permit process but prior to construction starts, there is new code contradictory to what was permitted. What should the architect do in this scenario?
I have a few possible answers but I don't know what the correct answer is so would like to post the question here and thanks a lot for your help in advance!
-
Based on this scenario the project has already been permitted, therefore already gone through the AHJ’s review process for compliance. Usually there is a grace period before a new code is enacted. Typically projects submitted for review before a new code goes into effect or have already been in the review/queue process when the new code went into effect are held to the previous codes min. standard. This transition of when which version of the code are enforced is the decision of the particular AHJ. The architect’s responsibility is to meet or exceed the min. standards of the codes set forth by that particular jurisdiction. The architect proceeds with construction as the project is code compliant based on the AHJ review and approval of applicable codes.
-
"grandfathered" is the term I'm most familiar with. your submission date corresponds to the codes that were current at the date of submission - if something changes your building is "grandfathered" into the code that it was submitted under. *for example the (IBC 2015) In my area it's not typically referred to as a "grace period" and people wouldn't use that word - you're at no graces with our officials...
My second thought is; there are cases where the officials do not allow for this; and the other key term would be "variance" - if your building or design or whatever you're proposing is not compliant to a local code you can ask for a variance in regard to getting the work completed as you have drawn it. This process, in the real world, typically takes a really really long time and is a lot of time and phone calls with people who half way care about your issue. So; professionally people don't typically seek variances unless there's something major being asked for. but; in NCARB world check the responses for that term. It'll usually be an option.
Another thought; life safety issues are rarely granted variances in real word application; its quite common to get a zoning variance. In Texas we have zoning codes that say; "the building must be at least 80 percent masonry", this is decided by the city to preserve a historical district's character. Interestingly. the state legislature has also decided that this is illegal for local governments to require materials or design features to comply with zoning; so we have this really awkward situation many times where the state laws and local laws are in conflict. Because local government WANTS nice buildings; but the state of Texas says they can't require things such as material species being a "required" element of a building. We typically navigate this via variances; it's generally a compromise between all parties and we end up with say 40% brick masonry provided rather than the 80% the city "required". trust me. it's a very messy chaos to keep everyone happy out there...
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
3 comments