# Bedroom or storage room or bonus room



## rktect 1

Just for fun.

I thought I'd ask what others do when they see either a new finished out basement in an existing house with a room labeled storage.  The storage room has a closet, smoke detector, arc fault outlets but either no window or a window that does not meet escape requirements.

Same question when you see bonus rooms on the second floor and they don't want to install correct outlets or smoke detectors.  Usually these bonus rooms in this village come with an escape window the correct size.

So do you accept the permit based on the label of the room or deny the permit based on the ASSumed intended use?


----------



## Bootleg

If the room has a closet it will also need a smoke detector and an egress window.


----------



## rktect 1

Bootleg said:
			
		

> If the room has a closet it will also need a smoke detector and an egress window.


So no closet included in basement "storage room", with arc fault outlets and smoke detector = storage space, no escape window required?


----------



## Jobsaver

Same as Bootleg. If the room has a closet, we consider it to be a bedroom regardless of the immediate resident's intended use. We initially address this issue at plan review.

Add an egress element; remove a closet; etc.


----------



## Bootleg

rktect 1 said:
			
		

> So no closet included in basement "storage room", with arc fault outlets and smoke detector = storage space, no escape window required?


Yes.

rtect 1,

That's the way I do it to be consistent.


----------



## rktect 1

I'm just asking for clarification.  We are doing it the same way.  I suppose we'd rather have the arc fault outlets and smoke detector vs. nothing at all.


----------



## Yankee

We stopped defining by closet and started defining by labeled use. Still needs one means of egrees and one EERO, and smoke/CO alarm, arc fault.


----------



## Coug Dad

job saver

So, if I put a closet in my basement to lock up guns, booze, business records, Christmas presents, or other items I don't want the kids to get into, you are going to classify that as a bedroom?????


----------



## cboboggs

We reveiw and inspect according to labeled use. We also will note the plan and permit that the basement room is not to be used as a bedroom.


----------



## mark handler

It is what the designer has labled it.

http://www4.iccsafe.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=005152#000008


----------



## Mac

Labeled use is the designated use we are aware of. I also include a note regarding the labeled use on the CO.

Somebody sleeping on a couch in a room doesn't make it a bedroom.


----------



## mn joe

I understand your dilemna,but there is nothing in the code that ties a closet to the definition of a bedroom. My old farmhouse has a closet in the living room and an "emergency escape and rescue opening" (door). That does not make it a bedroom. If the plans are labeled as "office" or "exercise room" or anything else then I accept that. I will note on the permit that the space is not designed or approved as a sleeping area. I think that if I start relabeling rooms that I am veering dangerously close to designing the structure.

Joe


----------



## Glennman CBO

This has a similar take to the window permit thread. R310.1 states that "basements [comma] habitable attics and every sleeping room shall have at least one operable EERO".

It doesn't matter if there is a closet or not, nor if it is labeled for sleeping or not, unless it falls under the exception (equipment, and 200 sq ft). It needs an EERO.


----------



## TimNY

IRC says "sleeping rooms", PMC says, "rooms used for sleeping purposes" when referring to bedrooms.

A bedroom also has to be habitable, to wit conditioned.  All habitable rooms also have light and ventilation requirements.

Put that whole mess together and it is really up to the discretion of the inspector.  I don't believe a sleeping room is defined by the presence of a closet, but rather by the use of the room.

The County did away with the "label game", as people would have a den, a family room, a library, a media room, an office.. everything but bedrooms since more bedrooms == more septic.

My personal feeling would be that if you have a room without a window, it is not a bedroom.  I would put it on the CO that it is not to be used for sleeping purposes.

You can't try and avoid every possibility that a homeowner is going to do something not permitted after CO issuance.  They may set up a landing strip in the backyard-- are you going to require landing lights?


----------



## Yankee

Glennman CBO said:
			
		

> This has a similar take to the window permit thread. R310.1 states that "basements [comma] habitable attics and every sleeping room shall have at least one operable EERO".It doesn't matter if there is a closet or not, nor if it is labeled for sleeping or not, unless it falls under the exception (equipment, and 200 sq ft). It needs an EERO.


Yes, every habitable room needs a means of egress and and EERO. The EERO does not have to be a window, and unless it is a sleeping room, does not have to open directly to the outside. I think.


----------



## righter101

Bedroom or not

I would be curious to see other jurisdications policies of "creation of a sleeping room", or definitions of bedroom.

We have this issue coming up all the time.  The biggest reason for us, being a rural county, served by septic, the required septic design is based on the number of bedrooms.  If you have a 3 bedroom design, you can not build or remodel your house to a condition that would have 4 bedrooms, without upgrading your septic system.

I have seen offices, dens, game rooms, sewing rooms, meditation rooms, bonus rooms, singing rooms, piano rooms, reading rooms, sanctums, etc.... all "not a bedroom".

We generally have our landuse people make the determination if it is a bedroom or not, then if it is, we (building) apply the EEOR and SD requirements.  They do allow built in items, such as desks or bookshelves to evidence that something is not a bedroom.

The most recent dilema came from someone building a garage with an attached "reading room".  The reading room has a full bathroom.  We deemed it a bedroom, denied the design because it had direct access to the garage, and exceeded the septic design for the property.

This issue probably causes more arguments between our building vs. land use staff, as well as applicants.

We have a policy on the creation of a sleeping room, but i would like to see some others to perhaps improve on ours.

Fun Fun Fun.....


----------



## TimNY

Yankee said:
			
		

> Yes, every habitable room needs a means of egress and and EERO. The EERO does not have to be a window, and unless it is a sleeping room, does not have to open directly to the outside. I think.


In regards to every level except a basement and an attic, every _sleeping_ room needs an EERO, not every _habitable_ room.  Welcome to the quagmire!  

It does bring up a good point.. some of these bonus rooms could meet the definition of 'habitable attic', and therefore required an EERO.

An unpermitted finished basement would have to comply with the code in effect of the time of conversion.  So far (around here), that means no EERO required in a basement.  Unless there is a sleeping room.


----------



## TimNY

righter101 said:
			
		

> I would be curious to see other jurisdications policies of "creation of a sleeping room", or definitions of bedroom.


For the purposes of septic here, each home is allotted a kitchen, living room, dining room, foyer and another room such as "den", "study", "library" (whatever they want to call it), all other rooms are bedrooms.  An unfinished basement is also exempt.


----------



## brudgers

Bootleg said:
			
		

> If the room has a closet it will also need a smoke detector and an egress window.


Code section?


----------



## brudgers

Jobsaver said:
			
		

> Same as Bootleg. If the room has a closet, we consider it to be a bedroom regardless of the immediate resident's intended use. We initially address this issue at plan review.Add an egress element; remove a closet; etc.


Code section?


----------



## georgia plans exam

If a room is designated as a den, library, bonus room or whatever, that is what it is whether or not it has a closet. I sometimes wonder what that room is called when the house is eventually sold but, that is beyond our purview.

GPE


----------



## rktect 1

So if they label the garage a kitchen, can they have direct access from their kitchen into a bedroom?


----------



## TimNY

rktect 1 said:
			
		

> So if they label the garage a kitchen, can they have direct access from their kitchen into a bedroom?


Gas oven or electric oven?  

In the end you have to be reasonable.  I have gone on final inspections where people have beds where they shouldn't be.  They fail.  Is the only solution to installed an egress window, or can you also remove the bed?

One situation was in the basement where they decided to flip-flop the media room and the bedroom, wherein the bedroom no longer had an EERO.  When I went back the room was empty, and they passed.

CO had a note stating no sleeping in that room.  Could they have put the bedroom back in there? Maybe.  But it was compliant when I left.  You can't preempt what a homeowner will do.  If you find a person running an auto body shop out of their home, do you make them remove it, or do you make them put a spray booth in?


----------



## Glennman CBO

Whatever the room is titled is what the room is. There is no such thing as a closet automatically making a room a sleeping room. If the room has a closet and it is called a "den", then it is a "den" that just happens to have a closet in it.


----------



## GHRoberts

I agree with those who follow the labels shown on the plans.

---

A "garage" labeled "kitchen" would be a kitchen if it met the requirements of a kitchen.


----------



## Bootleg

georgia plans exam said:
			
		

> If a room is designated as a den, library, bonus room or whatever, that is what it is whether or not it has a closet. I sometimes wonder what that room is called when the house is eventually sold but, that is beyond our purview.GPE


It's called a bedroom when it's sold.


----------



## Bootleg

Glennman CBO said:
			
		

> Whatever the room is titled is what the room is. There is no such thing as a closet automatically making a room a sleeping room. If the room has a closet and it is called a "den", then it is a "den" that just happens to have a closet in it.


I would have to disagree.


----------



## raider1

Bootleg said:
			
		

> If the room has a closet it will also need a smoke detector and an egress window.


Got a code section to back that up?

I am not aware of any definition in the IRC that states a bedroom must have a closet or that any room with a closet must be a bedroom.



			
				Bootleg said:
			
		

> It's called a bedroom when it's sold.


I don't care if they call it a bedroom when they sell the home, that is up to the homeowner. If the submitted plans indicate that the room is not a bedroom then that is how it should be treated.



			
				Bootleg said:
			
		

> I would have to disagree.


Do you have a code section to back that up?

Chris


----------



## MarkRandall

This issue is only slightly related to septic requirements (number of bedrooms). It's my understanding that in my area any room with a closet is considered as a bedroom for septic system design. I don't know what the actual code says. For houses on septic, I do not design a closet or storage space for the den for this reason. If not on septiic, I have shown storage space as part of a den. It's usually fairly obvious that a room is designed as a den or bedroom based on location in the plan.

I go with the others who say note on the permit drawings that it is not to be a sleeping and be done with it.


----------



## rktect 1

Ok, Ok, Ok, wait.  Now who here has ever gotten a phone call from a resident who recently purchased a home, built in the last 20 years, and were asked "I just purchased this home and there is a bedroom in the basement with no escape window?"?

Anybody?  What is your typical response to that?  I suppose it would have to be "We didn't issue a permit for a bedroom." or "We didn't issue a permit." or "It must be a storage room."


----------



## mjesse

rktect 1 said:
			
		

> Ok, Ok, Ok, wait.  Now who here has ever gotten a phone call from a resident who recently purchased a home, built in the last 20 years, and were asked "I just purchased this home and there is a bedroom in the basement with no escape window?"?  Anybody?  What is your typical response to that?  I suppose it would have to be "We didn't issue a permit for a bedroom." or "We didn't issue a permit." or "It must be a storage room."


Just had that one this week. Prospective buyers are disputing realtors claim of "3 bedroom" when a basement bedroom has no EERO.

We have no record of a finished basement (surprise) So it's a 2 bedroom to me.

mj


----------



## cboboggs

Bootleg: Do you have a code section to back up your opinion or has your local code been amended to include the basis for your objection? If your code has not been amended, then you don't have a basis for your objection. The plan should be reviewed and inspections performed based on the label on the plans and the CO should be noted.


----------



## FredK

It's whatever they want to call it IMHO.  Nothing more.

As to I just bought this and it's not permitted stuff.  It's a sad story but then you need to comply with getting a permit and fixxing all that's wrong is my response.


----------



## Jobsaver

Coug Dad said:
			
		

> job saverSo, if I put a closet in my basement to lock up guns, booze, business records, Christmas presents, or other items I don't want the kids to get into, you are going to classify that as a bedroom?????


As a rule, if the room otherwise meets other habitable room requirements, and has a closet, the answer is yes, I am going to classify it as a bedroom.

brudgers: There is not a code section I know of. Still, it is a guideline or baseline that we use to establish the difference between a sleeping area or a living area.


----------



## Yankee

From the label. The closet way is just wrong.


----------



## mark handler

So, when I fall asleep on my living room chair, it is now a sleeping room and needs a smoke detector, and egress window....Where does it end

The room is as indicated on the plans.


----------



## Jobsaver

Wrong as in "in error", or as in morally wrong? Whether it is wrong or not depends on whether or not you are looking at the intent of the code, or merely the letter of the code.

Personally, I believe the intent of addressing egress elements, smoke alarm requirements, etc., is simply to prevent people from dying in housefires, in the rooms of a home most likely to be used for sleeping on a regular basis. If I error, it is on the side of caution.

And, as previously said, the closet rule is a baseline. There are rooms with closets that are obviously not intended to be bedrooms.

Labels are at least as arbitrary as the closet rule, and more subject to being misused if allowed to circumvent restrictions.


----------



## Bootleg

I find this to be very funny I said this is the way I call it as a building inspector and I am very consistent.

If it looks like a bedroom and has a closet it must have an egress window and a smoke detector if you want me to approve it.


----------



## Yankee

How do you justify having smoke detectors in every bedroom? MOST house fires start in other locations than bedrooms.


----------



## Jobsaver

mark handler said:
			
		

> So, when I fall asleep on my living room chair, it is now a sleeping room and needs a smoke detector, and egress window....Where does it endThe room is as indicated on the plans.


It ends with the closet in my ahj. Sleep wherever you want.


----------



## mark handler

TimNY said:
			
		

> ...all other rooms are bedrooms.


Code section?

Making up codes?


----------



## Jobsaver

Yankee said:
			
		

> How do you justify having smoke detectors in every bedroom? MOST house fires start in other locations than bedrooms.


The NEC requires both inside sleeping rooms and in a corridor serving sleeping rooms. Probably, because it is hard to tell if there is a fire in the kitchen when you are sleeping.


----------



## mark handler

Jobsaver said:
			
		

> It ends with the closet in my ahj.


Is a storage space with a door a closet? Entry halls are by your definition a bedroom.

Is a Pantry with a door a closet? Kitchens are by your definition a bedroom.


----------



## Bootleg

Yankee said:
			
		

> How do you justify having smoke detectors in every bedroom? MOST house fires start in other locations than bedrooms.


Yankee,

That's right most house fires start in other locations than a bedroom.

So when you are in your bedroom asleep and the fire is in another location your interconnected smoke alarm will wake you and because you have an egress window the fire fighter can save you.


----------



## Bootleg

mark handler said:
			
		

> Is a storage space with a door a closet? Entry halls are by your definition a bedroom.Is a Pantry with a door a closet? Kitchens are by your definition a bedroom.


I believe this is why we have building codes and need building inspectors.


----------



## mark handler

Bootleg said:
			
		

> I believe this is why we have building codes and need building inspectors.


building inspectors, who make up their own codes?


----------



## Jobsaver

mark handler said:
			
		

> Code section? Making up codes?


Calling a stairway a ladder does not a ladder make. It is my interpretation of the intent of the code, where a definition is lacking.

Where does the code state a label makes a room what a room is? The making up codes argument is lame.


----------



## Yankee

Bootleg said:
			
		

> Yankee,That's right most house fires start in other locations than a bedroom.
> 
> So when you are in your bedroom asleep and the fire is in another location your interconnected smoke alarm will wake you and because you have an egress window the fire fighter can save you.


Of course.

Why not simply insist on EERO and a smoke alarm in every room which has a door? What about rooms with no closets that turn into bedrooms? A closet-less den is a likely candidate.


----------



## Bootleg

mark handler said:
			
		

> building inspectors, who make up their own codes?


Where did I make up a code like I said before I will not approve it.


----------



## Jobsaver

mark handler said:
			
		

> Is a storage space with a door a closet? Entry halls are by your definition a bedroom.Is a Pantry with a door a closet? Kitchens are by your definition a bedroom.


Please read previous posts. The closet rule is a baseline. There are rooms with closets that obviously are not intended to be bedrooms.


----------



## mark handler

Provide code section for "The closet rule"  baseline.


----------



## Jobsaver

It is a function of plan review.


----------



## TimNY

mark handler said:
			
		

> Code section? Making up codes?


Mark, how about reading the thread before throwing out ignorant quips.



			
				TimNY said:
			
		

> *The County* did away with the "label game", as people would have a den, a family room, a library, a media room, an office.. everything but bedrooms since more bedrooms == more septic.





			
				righter101 said:
			
		

> I would be curious to see other jurisdications policies of "creation of a sleeping room", or definitions of bedroom.
> 
> We have this issue coming up all the time. The biggest reason for us, being a rural county, served by septic, the required septic design is based on the number of bedrooms. If you have a 3 bedroom design, you can not build or remodel your house to a condition that would have 4 bedrooms, without upgrading your septic system.





			
				TimNY said:
			
		

> For the purposes of *septic* here, each home is allotted a kitchen, living room, dining room, foyer and another room such as "den", "study", "library" (whatever they want to call it), all other rooms are bedrooms. An unfinished basement is also exempt.


I missed the part where the IRC governed the design of septic systems, or how to determine the size of a septic system.  I don't think that any authority regulating a septic system is required to be bound by the IRC definition of bedroom (whick, afaik, is NOT defined in the code).

I won't quote the numerous posts I have made stating the use of the room governs whether it is a SLEEPING ROOM, which is what is regulated, not a BEDROOM.

I have been nothing but respectful in all of my posts.  Please read before posting the one-liners.


----------



## Jobsaver

rktect 1 said:
			
		

> Just for fun.


Thanks rktect. This thread has been fun.


----------



## mark handler

TimNY said:
			
		

> Mark, how about reading the thread before throwing out ignorant quips.I have been nothing but respectful in all of my posts.  Please read before posting the one-liners.


"ignorant quips"

"nothing but respectful in all of my posts"

*Very respectful*

Originally Posted by TimNY

...all other rooms are bedrooms.

All I want to know is where "in the code" is the basis of the asertion made, I'm not being disrespectful I'm reading your post.


----------



## TimNY

Mark,

I gave you your answer.  Let me try again:

1.  Our County Health Department uses these guidelines, not me.

2.  There is no section of the IRC regulating the design of the septic system.

3.  The County has their own sanitary code.

4.  The County defines 'bedroom' in their sanitary code.  The IRC (again, as far as I know) does not define the word 'bedroom'

5.  The County determines the size of the septic system based on the number of 'bedrooms'

Would you please tell me where "in the code" they are incorrect?  You cannot, because it would be like trying to use the IRC to regulate an automobile inspection.  Frankly, I think we have they same outlook on 'sleeping rooms' as far as EERO and smoke alarms are required, but you appear to be too high on your horse to see it.

Ignorant is a valid adjective and applies to the situation.  I don't see it as disrespectful.  I have used it in reference to myself when confronted with certain subjects that I am unfamiliar with.  Unfortunately I think popular use of the word has given it a negative connotation, much like the word 'moron' which was also a valid psychology term until it was bastardized by the masses.


----------



## Yankee

As to the "septic system argument", my jurisdiction also used to count bedroom as rooms with closets and be diligent about checking that the number of bedrooms equaled the number approved on the septic plan. But in the end we realized that it didn't matter. The number of bedrooms doesn't equate to the actual load on the system (that is simply a design value). You can imagine, it is the number of people and the manner of use that causes the load. If homeowners overload their system and blow it out, they must build another.

So counting bedrooms as those labeled does make sense, and encouraging all "closed door" spaces to have secondary means of escape also makes sense.


----------



## mark handler

You don't see "ignorant quips" as disrespectful?

Remember that. I will.


----------



## JBI

Play nice boys... There is no code based arguement for relabeling of interior rooms or spaces by the AHJ. You can't control what people will do after the CofO is issued, pull up your big boy undies and deal with it. Buyers and real estate people are getting more savvy all the time and checking with the AHJ before buying/listing a home, and yes you will certainly catch more than  a few violations through this process. Issuing a CofO is like setting a speed limit, you list everything you possibly can and hope people will do the right thing. IF YOU CATCH SOMEONE SPEEDING, THEN ISSUE THEM A TICKET. Until you catch them in violation, there is nothing to cite.

Personally, if I had my plans turned down because of some 'policy' with no legitimate force of law behind it, your jurisdiction (possibly you personally) will be paying for my house and then some. Code Officials are not G-D, certification is not deification. If you can't cite a code section, don't try to enforce your personal opinion.

i seem to be agreeing with brudgers an awful lot lately... THAT's scary! LOL (just kidding Ben...)


----------



## Bootleg

JBI said:
			
		

> Play nice boys... There is no code based arguement for relabeling of interior rooms or spaces by the AHJ. You can't control what people will do after the CofO is issued, pull up your big boy undies and deal with it. Buyers and real estate people are getting more savvy all the time and checking with the AHJ before buying/listing a home, and yes you will certainly catch more than  a few violations through this process. Issuing a CofO is like setting a speed limit, you list everything you possibly can and hope people will do the right thing. IF YOU CATCH SOMEONE SPEEDING, THEN ISSUE THEM A TICKET. Until you catch them in violation, there is nothing to cite. Personally, if I had my plans turned down because of some 'policy' with no legitimate force of law behind it, your jurisdiction (possibly you personally) will be paying for my house and then some. Code Officials are not G-D, certification is not deification. If you can't cite a code section, don't try to enforce your personal opinion.
> 
> i seem to be agreeing with brudgers an awful lot lately... THAT's scary! LOL (just kidding Ben...)


John,

You surprised me, as a building inspector, if I put my name on it and someone (god forbid) doesn't make it, because the fire department can't get in and there is not a fire detector.

All I said is I will not approve it but if you want to, BE MY GUEST.


----------



## mark handler

Bootleg said:
			
		

> .... BE MY GUESS.


Guest?....


----------



## Bootleg

mark handler said:
			
		

> Guest?....


Thank's Mark.


----------



## Robert Ellenberg

One jurisdiction I built in solved the septic problem by setting the minium size system as what was needed for a 3 bedroom home--even if you called it a one bedroom cottage. If you showed more than 3, you put in a bigger system.


----------



## TimNY

Robert Ellenberg said:
			
		

> One jurisdiction I built in solved the septic problem by setting the minium size system as what was needed for a 3 bedroom home--even if you called it a one bedroom cottage. If you showed more than 3, you put in a bigger system.


The minimum system here is 4 bedrooms in most cases.  When you get to wetlands and shallow pools they will approve a 3 bedroom simply because a 4 bedroom system will not fit.


----------



## TimNY

mark handler said:
			
		

> You don't see "ignorant quips" as disrespectful?Remember that. I will.


Mark,

You continue to deflect attention from yourself.  You stated "code section?"  I have no issue with this.  You really contribute nothing to the thread with the statement (it had been said before, if you hadn't noticed), but I can see your point when you misinterpreted my statements.

You followed this statement with "Making up codes?"  1) Ignorant:  lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified  2) Quip: a clever usually taunting remark : gibe

Ignorant in the fact that you came out "guns blazing" without reading the thread to understand what my position was.  Quip in that "making up codes" was clearly a ripe remark despite your attempts to back peddle, ie "All I want to know is where "in the code" is the basis of the asertion made, I'm not being disrespectful I'm reading your post. "

No, Mark, you wanted to excite the situation by asserting your assumed superior position with a quip.  When you realized you were wrong, you tried to deflect attention onto me when it was you who was clearly not only wrong, but disrespectful.



			
				mark handler said:
			
		

> You don't see "ignorant quips" as disrespectful?
> 
> Remember that. I will.


Yes, I do see your ignorant quips as disrespectful.  My pointing them out is simply a matter of fact.


----------



## Jobsaver

JBI said:
			
		

> Personally, if I had my plans turned down because of some 'policy' with no legitimate force of law behind it, your jurisdiction (possibly you personally) will be paying for my house and then some. Code Officials are not G-D, certification is not deification. If you can't cite a code section, don't try to enforce your personal opinion. i seem to be agreeing with brudgers an awful lot lately... THAT's scary! LOL (just kidding Ben...)


R109.4 Approval required.

Work shall not be done beyond the point indicated in each successive inspection without first obtaining the approval of the building official. The building official upon notification, shall make the requested inspections and shall either indicate the portion of the construction that is satisfactory as completed, or shall notify the permit holder or an agent of the permit holder _*wherein the same fails to comply with this code.*_ Any portions that do not comply shall be corrected and such portion shall not be covered or concealed until authorized by the building official.

I understand the argument, but do not believe an arbitrary label legally defines a room either. I'll take my chances in court.

PS: If you plan on my personal assets paying for your house, you probably ought to start looking in the tent section at Walmart. Sorry . . . too many ex's already pulled that stunt on me!


----------



## rktect 1

Jobsaver said:
			
		

> Thanks rktect. This thread has been fun.


Didn't realize what a hot topic this would turn out to be.


----------



## mark handler

Tim

I do read all the posts.

You had made pronouncements and statements with no basis in the code.

I asked for a code reference, or basis, for those  statements.

That’s it, I did not call you names, or question your intelligence.


----------



## Yankee

The point is there is nothing in the code that defines a room for sleeping (bedroom).

When an applicant submits a plan (think about commercial applications and zoning reviews also) they label the use of the areas on the plan in order to have the plan reviewed for the code requirements for that use.

There is latitude for the BO to require an area to be labeled/reviewed for a different use if the BO has code language that backs that decision.

There is no code language to back a decision of a closet = sleeping room.


----------



## High Desert

What you're approving is what is on the plans, period. I could sleep in my bathtub and I would dare any code official to take me to court on it (actually I am the BO where I live so I'd have to cite myself into court). You cannot control what a homeowner does after the C.O. If you think they mislabeled a room that you think is a sleeping room, then encourage them to install an EERO and smoke alarm, but I don't think you can require it.


----------



## mtlogcabin

R105.3 Application for permit.

To obtain a permit, the applicant shall first file an application therefor in writing on a form furnished by the department of building safety for that purpose. Such application shall:

1. Identify and describe the work to be covered by the permit for which application is made. How many bedrooms & sleeping rooms? Will the den double as a sleeping room for guest? simple question during plan review or on the application

4. Be accompanied by construction documents and other information as required in Section R106.1.

R106.1.1 Information on construction documents.

Construction documents shall be drawn upon suitable material. Electronic media documents are permitted to be submitted when approved by the building official. Construction documents shall be of sufficient clarity to indicate the location, nature and extent of the work proposed and show in detail that it will conform to the provisions of this code and relevant laws, ordinances, rules and regulations, as determined by the building official. It is what the plans say and nothing more


----------



## Jobsaver

Yankee said:
			
		

> As to the "septic system argument", my jurisdiction also used to count bedroom as rooms with closets and be diligent about checking that the number of bedrooms equaled the number approved on the septic plan. But in the end we realized that it didn't matter. The number of bedrooms doesn't equate to the actual load on the system (that is simply a design value). You can imagine, it is the number of people and the manner of use that causes the load. If homeowners overload their system and blow it out, they must build another.So counting bedrooms as those labeled does make sense, and encouraging all "closed door" spaces to have secondary means of escape also makes sense.


You can imagine, it is the number of people living in a home that determines the load, and probable use, of rooms having closable doors and closets. These are the rooms most likely to be used as sleeping rooms. They are, in my determination, the very type of room that the code refers to as sleeping rooms.

What mother buys a home without first checking for closet space serving the bedrooms?


----------



## beach

We've run into this problem in the past where the plans showed a bedroom with a door from the garage opening into it, the architect changed the bedroom to an "Office" on the plans and it was then approved...... you can't give a guy a ticket just because he owns a Ferrari that can do 200 mph, unless he actually goes over the speed limit...... and gets caught......


----------



## Jobsaver

beach:

I have had the exact same circumstance, but would not approve the plan. The builder changed the closet to built-in cabinetry for office storage. Plan approved.

I guess I am making it harder to build that Ferrari. And, that "bonus room" with a closet. And, that "seperate mother-in-law quarters" that is really a duplex.

But, I do not give many tickets.


----------



## Mule

From the 2006 IRC

CHAPTER 2

DEFINITIONS

R201.3 Terms defined in other codes. Where terms are not

defined in this code such terms shall have meanings ascribed to

them as in other code publications of the International Code

Council.

From the 2006 IPMC

SECTION 202

GENERAL DEFINITIONS

BEDROOM. Any room or space used or intended to be used

for sleeping purposes in either a dwelling or sleeping unit.


----------



## mtlogcabin

> BEDROOM. Any room or space used or intended to be used for sleeping purposes in either a dwelling or sleeping unit.


So a den or bonus room or office that may double as a guest sleeping room would have to comply. Just ask right questions and review it on the information provided.


----------



## Jobsaver

Thanks mt. No such definition in the 2006IRC.


----------



## FredK

Well I see we're beating ourselves up again on what's the proper call.  The code as usual is vague and will continue to be that way so the best one can do is what their jurisdiction has been doing in the past.  Would be great if the code covered it and people wouple wouldn't lie as to save $$$ from tax man, septic or fees.

Ain't going to happen IMHO so if you want to call it something because you think it might be used for a bedroom be prepared for the one that will balk at doing the required items needed.  Rewrite your code section to include the things you think are important.

Until then it is what's it's listed on the plan.


----------



## Mule

IF they "intended" to use it for sleeping purposes.

IF incidental and they (the owner) originally did not "intend" to use the room for sleeping purposes then no.

I don't think just throwing a label on a room justifies what a room is. If a plan reviewer determines the intent of the room is a bedroom then that room is a bedroom.

Now how do you know what the intent is?? Judgement call? We make judgement calls all the time in our profession.

If it looks like a skunk, smells like a skunk, then it's Janet Reno!


----------



## cboboggs

Well said, FredK. As was stated earlier, we have no control over what someone does after they move in the house. Review and inspect for what is on the plan. You cannot require something because "I know that is what you are going to do with it.", that just won't stand up in court. If you feel that strongly, amend your code to include those requirements.


----------



## mtlogcabin

> Thanks mt. No such definition in the 2006IRC.


But the IRC does allow you to use a definition found in other ICC code publications

R201.3 Terms defined in other codes.

Where terms are not defined in this code such terms shall have meanings ascribed to them as in other code publications of the International Code Council.


----------



## beach

Make sure you write an ordinance prohibiting "sofabeds" in living rooms that don't comply with bedroom requirements


----------



## Jobsaver

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> But the IRC does allow you to use a definition found in other ICC code publications R201.3 Terms defined in other codes.
> 
> Where terms are not defined in this code such terms shall have meanings ascribed to them as in other code publications of the International Code Council.


Thanks again mt. I am glad to have a definition.

Still, the definition given goes to intent. And, the question bears asking, who's intent.? The builder? The architect? The original owner? The third owner? The code official?


----------



## Jobsaver

beach said:
			
		

> Make sure you write an ordinance prohibiting "sofabeds" in living rooms that don't comply with bedroom requirements


We keep our sofabeds on the front porch in Arkansas!


----------



## fatboy

WOW!........take a day away from the forum and look what happens!

We used to go with the ol' closet with a clothes rod, now we just go with the labeled intended use at the time of final inspection and move on.

JMHO (at this late date0


----------



## mtlogcabin

> We keep our sofabeds on the front porch in Arkansas!


And you have to share with the hound and kerr dogs  

Thankfully when I vist the daughter down there she has a clean one in the living room for the wife and I. Come to think of it. living room has a door that leads directly out side so no Egress window required and the smoke alarm is 5 feet down the hall with no door so technically it servers the living room (same ceiling level) So I would pass it as a room that may be intended for sleeping purposes.


----------



## beach

Seriously, this hits close to home.... when I designed my remodel, I added a large office for my wife who "telecommutes" for her job, the plan check engineer in my city required me to remove the "closet" that I had shown on the plans..... the "closet" was for basic office supplies, etc. although it was big enough to hang clothes in. I ended up speaking to the BO and asked him to show me the code section that says an office can't have a closet, he stated that the office “could” be used as bedroom.... I told him that any room could be used as a sleeping area, the plan says office, I’m intending to use it as an office and you’re basically calling me a liar….let’s get the City attys. opinion on the city assuming that I will do something contrary to what I show on the plans.

My wife has a nice office with a closet and I try not to assume or be too hypocritical after that ordeal. If the plan shows other than a bedroom, someone sleeps in it and has problems, the liability falls on the owner. 

Where do you sleep when your wife kicks you out of the bedroom????


----------



## brudgers

Jobsaver said:
			
		

> brudgers: There is not a code section I know of. Still, it is a guideline or baseline that we use to establish the difference between a sleeping area or a living area.


Then you are not applying the code correctly. Since you are knowingly doing so, another line of work is probably appropriate.


----------



## brudgers

beach said:
			
		

> Make sure you write an ordinance prohibiting "sofabeds" in living rooms that don't comply with bedroom requirements


My dog sleeps on the floor.

Better prohibit floors.


----------



## mark handler

Mule said:
			
		

> ... intended to be used for sleeping purposes in either a dwelling or sleeping unit.


Im in trouble so often it is *"...intended..."* that the couch *...." be used for sleeping purposes".*


----------



## rktect 1

beach said:
			
		

> Make sure you write an ordinance prohibiting "sofabeds" in living rooms that don't comply with bedroom requirements


Is the living room enclosed?


----------



## conarb

Beach said:
			
		

> Where do you sleep when your wife kicks you out of the bedroom????


Oh God, now he's going to require egress windows and fire sprinklers in dog houses!


----------



## beach

> Is the living room enclosed?


For the sake of argument, let's say the living room does not meet bedroom requirements...


----------



## Jobsaver

beach said:
			
		

> Where do you sleep when your wife kicks you out of the bedroom????


With my next wife. Usually on the sleeper sofa on the front porch.


----------



## High Desert

I think I've slept in every room of my house at one time or another, including the bathroom. If it's a living room, it only needs to meet the requirements of a living room for minimum size, light and ventilation, etc. even if it's enclosed. Otherwise, every enclosed room that "could possibly" be used as a sleeping area would have to have smoke and CO detectors and EERO's.

You can't protect people from themselves. I still believe in personal freedom and one of those freedoms is I can fall asleep in my Lazy-Boy, in my enclosed living room, watching TV.


----------



## Jobsaver

brudgers said:
			
		

> Then you are not applying the code correctly. Since you are knowingly doing so, another line of work is probably appropriate.


Thanks, but no thanks. I.m gonna keep work'in on it 'till I always do it right . . . er . . . correctly, the way you boys in Alabama do.


----------



## TimNY

I say it is how the room is intended to be used.  I am not going to break shoes over labels.  I need to know if it will be used for sleeping or not.  They could label the "bedroom" and "moordeb", I just want to know if they intend to sleep in it.

It is a good question: as _who_ intends to use it.  For purposes of the C.O. it is whoever is the permit holder.  If the builder says it won't be used for sleeping purposes, then so be it.  You simply cannot protect people from themselves, nor is there a crystal ball to determine if they are telling the truth or not.  A subsequent owner may turn a rec room into another bedroom, who knows.


----------



## GHRoberts

All of this adversary stuff has to go away.

We need people who are honest in their intent - both as the permit applicants and as the AHJs.

Who says a doorway makes the "bonus room" a room. It is just part of the adjacent hall. An alcove in the hall so that one can access the storage closet.


----------



## Jobsaver

GH:

There are many threats of lawsuits in these threads, but that may be an exaggeration. I do not really know how it works in New York or California. Here, in my small community, the process is rarely adversarial.

I have preferences . . . and may even be mistaken about this or that code issue. Still, folks usually accomodate me with little fuss.

I try hard to accomodate them as well. I am on a footing or sewer line or underslab plumbing inspection within thirty minutes of receiving a call, and everybody has my phone number. Builders and tradesmen around here appreciate my quick service, and accessibility.

The building industry is a relationship based industry in which it is difficult to reduce all the variables to pat answers and procedures. Relationships rule.


----------



## righter101

JBI said:
			
		

> Play nice boys... There is no code based arguement for relabeling of interior rooms or spaces by the AHJ.


IBC Section 1004.1.1 states in part

 "Where an intended use is not listed in Table 1004.1.1, the

building official shall establish a use based on a listed use

that most nearly resembles the intended use."

so there is some code based arguement for labeling of interior rooms or spaces....


----------



## High Desert

IBC Section 1004.1.1 is for determining design occupant load. You use that if the intended use is not listed in Table 1004.1.1, which it is. I don't see the connection.


----------



## peach

I have a closet in my office (at work... for umbrellas and jackets and such)..  I have a storage locker for office supplies in my office... my dining room at home is packed with computer equipment and code books... our extra bedroom upstairs is a storage room...

My point is.. realtors are the ones who consider a closet in a room as a "bedroom"... take the plans for what they are worth.  (I've found that most builders put a smoke detector and egress window in every room that "looks" like a bedroom.

I nap on my couch most afternoons...


----------



## TJacobs

From our zoning code:

BEDROOM: Each room in excess of three, other than kitchens, baths, laundries, pantries, foyers or

communicating corridors, shall be considered a bedroom, whether or not arranged or intended for

sleeping.

Works for me...no label games...


----------



## mark handler

TJacobs said:
			
		

> zoning code..


Not building code?


----------



## Jobsaver

TJacobs . . . finally, a calm voice of reason in a world (thread) gone insane.


----------



## TJacobs

Yes mark, zoning...


----------



## TJacobs

See, when your water and sewer tap fees are also based on number of bedrooms, the label game can be on steroids.


----------



## brudgers

Jobsaver said:
			
		

> I have preferences . . . and may even be mistaken about this or that code issue. Still, folks usually accomodate me with little fuss.


Giving your personal preferences the force of law is an abuse of power. People accommodate bullies. You should pursue another line of work.


----------



## brudgers

TJacobs said:
			
		

> From our zoning code:BEDROOM: Each room in excess of three, other than kitchens, baths, laundries, pantries, foyers or
> 
> communicating corridors, shall be considered a bedroom, whether or not arranged or intended for
> 
> sleeping.
> 
> Works for me...no label games...


Wow!

I never knew your zoning code was incorporated into the IBC by reference.


----------



## Yankee

brudgers said:
			
		

> Wow!I never knew your zoning code was incorporated into the IBC by reference.


Usually it is the other way 'round . . .


----------



## Jobsaver

brudgers said:
			
		

> Giving your personal preferences the force of law is an abuse of power. People accommodate bullies. You should pursue another line of work.


You should be a politician. You are good at taking what somebody says out of context, slander, and repeating gibberish.


----------



## Glennman CBO

Judging intent might come in if there is no label on the room in question.

If the room is called a den, but has a closet, we know what the intent is, because it says it. It is a den with a closet.

If there is no label, you can call it per what you think the intent is. Then when the applicant says (in writing) "it is a den with a closet", then the intent is now made clear. It is a den with a closet in it.


----------



## texasbo

For those of you who are making up your own rules about what constitutes a bedroom or sleeping room, you may have gotten away with it for a long time. You  may continue to get away with it for a long time. You will not always get away with it, and when your bluff finally gets called, all of your previous malfeasance will come into question.

Nothing gives our profession a bad name more than the code official zealot, who thinks it's his duty to play God, and "protect his lambs" at the expense of enforcing adopted laws.

If it's important to you to consider any room with a closet a bedroom, then write an amendment for your code, and get it approved by your elected officials. Otherwise, you'd better hope I don't move to your jurisdiction, because I DO have a library, game room, office, and loft, and they all have closets, and they will on my next home as well. And you will approve my plans.


----------



## brudgers

Jobsaver said:
			
		

> You should be a politician. You are good at taking what somebody says out of context, slander, and repeating gibberish.


You are unjustly forcing people to do something.

That's what bullying is.

It's wrong when you're a kid and it's wrong when you're a code official.


----------



## FredK

I'm with texasbo.

Amemd the code and then you can follow those rules.


----------



## mtlogcabin

Well said texasbo however you do not always have to ammend a code to clarify a portion of it. For those who use the zoning or health or the tax appraisers office/department rules as a means to identify a bedroom within their jurisdiction can simply be a matter of policy that is consistent throughout the jurisdiction. It should be a written policy with justification of why. If you would choose to challenge the policy that would be your right and it may be overturned but I doubt malfeasance will come into question.

R104.1 General.

The building official is hereby authorized and directed to enforce the provisions of this code. The building official shall have the authority to render interpretations of this code and to adopt policies and procedures in order to clarify the application of its provisions.

We are prohibted by the state from ammending the codes as adopted by them so a policy is our only option to clarify a provision


----------



## High Desert

mt, that section of the code is exactly why there is a section in the code for appealing the building official's interpretation. Too many weak interpretations of the code based on " don't think it feels right"


----------



## Jobsaver

Brudgers:

We discuss a thing with those submitting a plan and come to an agreement. And, to date, I have not had anyone buck up to the idea of providing a larger window for egress than originally planned, or adding cabinets for storage instead of a closet for a room that could be used either for an office or a bedroom. Should they chose to buck up, we have an appeals process, both informal or formal (codified).

Still, after discussing the issue in this thread, I do see further need for establishing this criteria by ordinance, or, maybe through zoning (like TJacobs).

But all the talk about bullying is gibberish. So are the references made in this thread to playing God. Its like calling somebody a liar for being five minutes late to an appointment.

What is the purpose of this forum? To learn. To improve. To have fun. Or, to throw stones.


----------



## Jobsaver

mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> We are prohibted by the state from ammending the codes as adopted by them so a policy is our only option to clarify a provision[/color]


In Arkansas, we cannot be less restrictive than the code adopted by the state, but can adopt ordinances making the code more restrictive.

The decision whether or not any such more restrictive code by ordinance would become adopted, is ultimately a decision of the City Council.


----------



## righter101

The connection



			
				High Desert said:
			
		

> IBC Section 1004.1.1 is for determining design occupant load. You use that if the intended use is not listed in Table 1004.1.1, which it is. I don't see the connection.


The connection, or point was to refute the statement that there is "no basis for AHJ labeling or designating room".  I was just offering code text that there is, in some instances, that basis.


----------



## texasbo

Good point. For those of you that are in states with state adopted building codes and are prohibiting from amending the code, I would urge you to get an interpretation from the state. Hey, if they're on board with calling a room with a closet a bedroom, then you're covered.

If there is a policy in a jurisdiction to require people to do something that is not adopted by ordinance, and you intentionally continue to do it, knowing full well that you have no ordinance backing you, then I have every reason to contend that malfeasance will be called into question, as what I've described is the very essence of malfeasance.



			
				mtlogcabin said:
			
		

> Well said texasbo however you do not always have to ammend a code to clarify a portion of it. For those who use the zoning or health or the tax appraisers office/department rules as a means to identify a bedroom within their jurisdiction can simply be a matter of policy that is consistent throughout the jurisdiction. It should be a written policy with justification of why. If you would choose to challenge the policy that would be your right and it may be overturned but I doubt malfeasance will come into question.R104.1 General.
> 
> The building official is hereby authorized and directed to enforce the provisions of this code. The building official shall have the authority to render interpretations of this code and to adopt policies and procedures in order to clarify the application of its provisions.
> 
> We are prohibted by the state from ammending the codes as adopted by them so a policy is our only option to clarify a provision


----------



## Jobsaver

texasbo said:
			
		

> If there is a policy in a jurisdiction to require people to do something that is not adopted by ordinance, and you intentionally continue to do it, knowing full well that you have no ordinance backing you, then I have every reason to contend that malfeasance will be called into question, as what I've described is the very essence of malfeasance.


I think the issue has been more one of interpretation of how a room for sleeping is defined. Civility calls for an assumption that the code official has the authority to make an interpretation, even if it is a wrong one, which can be established through the appeals process.


----------



## brudgers

Jobsaver said:
			
		

> Brudgers:We discuss a thing with those submitting a plan and come to an agreement. And, to date, I have not had anyone buck up to the idea of providing a larger window for egress than originally planned, or adding cabinets for storage instead of a closet for a room that could be used either for an office or a bedroom. Should they chose to buck up, we have an appeals process, both informal or formal (codified).
> 
> Still, after discussing the issue in this thread, I do see further need for establishing this criteria by ordinance, or, maybe through zoning (like TJacobs).
> 
> But all the talk about bullying is gibberish. So are the references made in this thread to playing God. Its like calling somebody a liar for being five minutes late to an appointment.
> 
> What is the purpose of this forum? To learn. To improve. To have fun. Or, to throw stones.


The reason people comply is because you are holding their permit hostage.


----------



## brudgers

Jobsaver said:
			
		

> Civility calls for an assumption that the code official has the authority to make an interpretation, even if it is a wrong one


Questioning your authority is bad manners?

You should pursue another line of work.


----------



## texasbo

Jobsaver said:
			
		

> I think the issue has been more one of interpretation of how a room for sleeping is defined. Civility calls for an assumption that the code official has the authority to make an interpretation, even if it is a wrong one, which can be established through the appeals process.


Well, one thing I know for certain: it's not defined by the presence of a closet, unless you've added such wording to your ordinance. An interpretation is one thing, the application of arbitrary criteria is another. I would counter that _civility_ calls for government  officials to refrain from random requirements that interfere with the rights of citizens.


----------



## Jobsaver

Tex: I am in agreement on all three points. Can this legally be established in the Zoning ordinance like in TJacob's ahj?



			
				TJacobs said:
			
		

> From our zoning code:BEDROOM: Each room in excess of three, other than kitchens, baths, laundries, pantries, foyers or
> 
> communicating corridors, shall be considered a bedroom, whether or not arranged or intended for
> 
> sleeping.
> 
> Works for me...no label games...


----------



## Mark K

I have on numerous occasions been forced to do something not required by the code because of a concern that the plan checker would hold the project hostage.  On one occasion the calculations I provided clearly complied with the code but because the plan checker was defending old practices I was forced to redo the calculations.  Because our client did not pay us to redo the calculations it cost us money.  There is little difference between these experiences and extortion.

The fact that the applicant accomodates an interpretation often means that it is easier to accomodate than to argue.


----------



## Jobsaver

Mark K:

Glad you chimed in on this thread. Is it your opinion that the definition for a bedroom, (sleeping room), can be legally established in the zoning code, as is the case in TJacob's jurisdiction?


----------



## texasbo

Jobsaver: I'm sure TJ has had the City Attorney look over the ordinance. However, I would be much more comfortable if there was a tie between the zoning and building code. For exmple, "yard" as defined in the zoning ordinance may be very different from the definition in the building code.

It would be so easy to err on the side of caution and add language to your building code ordinance such as, "bedroom or sleeping room as defined by the zoning ordinance of the city of _______".


----------



## Mark K

I support the legal principal that when there is a reasonable difference of opinion regarding a code interpretation that the applicant is allowed to use his interpretation.  Thus baring some provision to the contrary the room label on the drawings would govern.  It is then the occupants obligation not to use other rooms fro sleeping.

I believe that the concern that people will try to pull a fast one is counter productive and is intrusive.  Why should I not be able to have closets in my office?  What would keep me from installing cabinets in place of closets?

If the owner tries to claim more bedrooms when selling the house issue a citation.  If you have evidence of too many occupants or people using more rooms for sleeping issue citations otherwise step back and take a big breath and let the issue drop.  Do we want 2AM inspections to see where people are sleeping.

Jurisdictions should be careful not to use their right to interpret the code to in effect ammend the code.

I do not see a need to ammend the definition of "sleeping unit" in the IBC.   Since the IBC uses the term sleeping unit it would appear that introducting the term bedroom has the potential of causeing confusion.

Definitions in the zoning code would not be applicable to the building code unless there was an amendment to the building code that said that you should go to the zoning ordinance for definitions.  Be careful that there are not other definitions that could cause problems in the building code.  If you have the authority to adopt such an amendment then why not put it in the building code.


----------



## High Desert

If I had to rely on our zoning code for definitions, I would be in a world of hurt! I think it depends on the individual state law whether you can do that or not. Where I'm at, we cannot utilize our zoning code requirements to enforce a building code. That's like using a Serbian dictionary to define a Chineese word. It ain't gonna come out the same.


----------



## Jobsaver

Mark K said:
			
		

> Jurisdictions should be careful not to use their right to interpret the code to in effect ammend the code.


I support this principle. In 2003, upon obtaining authority in my ahj, I spearheaded a successful effort to revise all of our building codes to eliminate fifty years worth of miscellaneous ordinances, (about 70), creating more restrictive elements to the basic State Codes. I prefer less regulation, but, do believe the intent of the minimum code is to provide egress and interconnected smokes for all rooms in a house, for the life of that house, that are likely to be used as bedrooms.

I do not need to take a big breath on the citation issue. I have issued two citations, both during daytime hours, over the course of ten years. I am not big on heavy-handed government, and am frequently considered anti-government by my employers.

The error is in defining bedrooms. It comes from both being raised in and having a large family. In a move, the rooms with doors and closets were the first to be spoken for as bedrooms, and there were always more kids than rooms.

I believe, especially after exploring this thread, that there exists a deficiency in the code because it attempts to address having more restrictive life safety requirements for bedrooms, but is so ambiguous in the definition, it fails to address much of anything.


----------



## Yankee

Jobsaver said:
			
		

> Mark K:Glad you chimed in on this thread. Is it your opinion that the definition for a bedroom, (sleeping room), can be legally established in the zoning code, as is the case in TJacob's jurisdiction?


I am not Mark K, but, yes it can be legally established in the zoning code for the purposes of zoning. It cannot be legally established in the zoning code for the purposes of the building code (assuming the "building code" is not a locally defined code, but  code such as the IRC), even in the event that the building code is adopted locally through (as referenced by) the zoning code.

No.


----------



## peach

In most jurisdictions, the zoning code is going to prevail.. and I like TJ's ordinance.. if it's not anything else, it's a bedroom... because it _can_ be used as a sleeping room.


----------



## Jobsaver

peach said:
			
		

> In most jurisdictions, the zoning code is going to prevail.. and I like TJ's ordinance.. if it's not anything else, it's a bedroom... because it _can_ be used as a sleeping room.


I like the definition, simply because it does define. And, I think the definition matches the intent of the code.


----------



## mtlogcabin

I agree a bedroom is what is labled on the plans and would have a smoke detector and egress window. The number of bedrooms is what would be on the CO and that would be it as far as the building department is concerned.

I have worked where bedrooms governed septic sizes, once the health department approved what rooms where bedrooms then I made sure they complied with the building code.

Just because you know another departments criteria for identifying a bedroom do not do their work. We would not issue a building permit without septic approval and the plan submitted to us had to match the floor plan approved by the health department. Simple


----------



## High Desert

> From our zoning code:BEDROOM: Each room in excess of three, other than kitchens, baths, laundries, pantries, foyers or
> 
> communicating corridors, shall be considered a bedroom, whether or not arranged or intended for
> 
> sleeping.
> 
> Works for me...no label games...


So all of the rooms listed below would be a bedroom?

- Living rooms

- Dining rooms

- Toilet rooms (without a bath)

- Office/den

- Game/rec room,and

- any other room that wasn't excluded by the above denfinition


----------



## Jobsaver

Check out this post on this subject on the archived ICC bb. I think this person does a good job of addressing this issue.

tsmith

Frequent Contributor

  posted 04-08-2004 02:11 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm an architect, not a building official, so I'm not in a position of "telling people" anything. I'm simply relating what I have learned -- that a great many jurisdictions nationwide resolve this ambiguity in the code by coming up with their own policy defining a bedroom.

In the home plans that I'm involved in designing, I have to take this into account. I don't put a closet in an enclosed room unless I intend to count it as a bedroom, and show an egress window.

A key word is "enclosed" -- not many living rooms nowadays are fully enclosed and separated from the rest of the house, with access only by a single door. If I did design a den/study/library/computer room which I did not want to count as a bedroom, I'd show built-ins for storage rather than a closet, and show a wide cased opening rather than a door. In other words, give it specific physical characteristics which would prevent its being defined as a bedroom.

As I've said before, in my world, a bedroom is an asset, a feature, a selling point. From the design side, I WANT to count all the potential bedrooms. That's a major criterion in the way homes, and plans, are bought and sold.

And as Garth says, the overwhelming majority of people have never seen the blueprints of the house they inhabit. It doesn't matter to them how plans are labeled. They decide on usage of rooms based on the looking at the real room in real life -- the same way real estate agents count bedrooms when they're composing the ad.

Providing egress isn't difficult or expensive if it's considered in design. I never encounter home clients who want tiny little undersized windows, or get fighting mad about letting light into their home. In the great majority of plans I've been involved with, every habitable room has an egress-sized window anyway, simply for aesthetic reasons. I double-check all potential bedrooms to make sure of this, but normally it takes care of itself automatically.


----------



## Yankee

peach said:
			
		

> In most jurisdictions, the zoning code is going to prevail.. and I like TJ's ordinance.. if it's not anything else, it's a bedroom... because it _can_ be used as a sleeping room.


"if it's not anything else", as in, if it is not labeled and "looks" like a bedroom?

Look and see how your building code is adopted, , if locally, there is some hope you can fly with the zoning code definition. If adopted on a State basis thru RSA, there is no chance your zoning code definition will fly.


----------



## mark handler

TJacobs said:
			
		

> From our zoning code:BEDROOM: Each room in excess of three, other than kitchens, baths, laundries, pantries, foyers or
> 
> communicating corridors, shall be considered a bedroom, whether or not arranged or intended for
> 
> sleeping. Works for me...no label games...


So a walk in closet is a bedroom?


----------



## TimNY

High Desert said:
			
		

> So all of the rooms listed below would be a bedroom?- Living rooms
> 
> - Dining rooms
> 
> - Toilet rooms (without a bath)
> 
> - Office/den
> 
> - Game/rec room,and
> 
> - any other room that wasn't excluded by the above denfinition


His ordinance states "in excess of three", meaning you can have living room, dining room, office, kitchen, bathrooms, laundry room, pantry and foyer.  Other than that, it would be considered a bedroom.  If I understand correctly, that is.


----------



## JBI

"R109.4 Approval required.

Work shall not be done beyond the point indicated in each successive inspection without first obtaining the approval of the building official. The building official upon notification, shall make the requested inspections and shall either indicate the portion of the construction that is satisfactory as completed, or shall notify the permit holder or an agent of the permit holder _*wherein the same fails to comply with this code.*_ Any portions that do not comply shall be corrected and such portion shall not be covered or concealed until authorized by the building official."

Jobsaver, Several people have asked now it's my turn... What section of 'this code' have I not complied with by having a sewing room or den in my private home? You can't quote one because there is no basis in code for your answer.

Show me in your local law where you have the legal authority to define what I will or will not use a given room in my private home for. You sound like you are sincere about wanting to do a good job, and may not realize the severity of the personal liability you are exposing yourself to. For instance, if I had my plans denied by your office, or you attempted to force/coerce me into modifying my plans to suit your personal opinion, I would print out this very thread as evidence in my federal civil rights lawsuit against you and your municipality. Your municipality would likely have their case dismissed, unless they are aware of your misfeasance and do nothing to correct it. You however will have a hard time proving your case without the force of law behind your requirement.







 Originally Posted by *JBI* 



Play nice boys... There is no code based arguement for relabeling of interior rooms or spaces by the AHJ.

"IBC Section 1004.1.1 states in part

"Where an intended use is not listed in Table 1004.1.1, the

building official shall establish a use based on a listed use

that most nearly resembles the intended use."

so there is some code based arguement for labeling of interior rooms or spaces.... "

righter, you are seriously grasping at straws. That section does not apply in this case, first of all it is a Res Code issue, not IBC, second 1004.1.1 is for calculating occupant load:

"1004.1.1 Areas without fixed seating. The number of occupants shall be computed at the rate of one occupant per unit of area as prescribed in Table 1004.1.1. For areas without fixed seating, the _occupant load_ shall not be less than that number determined by dividing the floor area under consideration by the occupant per unit of area factor assigned to the occupancy as set forth in Table 1004.1.1. Where an intended use is not listed in Table 1004.1.1, the _building official_ shall establish a use based on a listed use that most nearly resembles the intended use."

How is that relvant to the OP?

TJacobs at least has the force of law with:

"From our zoning code:

BEDROOM: Each room in excess of three, other than kitchens, baths, laundries, pantries, foyers or

communicating corridors, shall be considered a bedroom, whether or not arranged or intended for

sleeping."

Zoning has the force of law.

As far as the connection between Zoning and Building Code, how about:

"*R102.2 Other laws.* The provisions of this code shall not be deemed to nullify any provisions of local, state or federal law."

from the 2009 IRC. How's that for a connection?

This is very interesting... so many posts and everyone overlooking the obvious...


----------



## mark handler

Back in '08 Florida actually  had a workshop to define the bedroom for the Florida Building Code (FBC)

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=10&ved=0CEMQFjAJ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dca.state.fl.us%2Ffbc%2Fcommission%2FFBC_0608%2FCommittee_Reports%2FBedroom_Definition_Workgroup_0508.doc&rct=j&q=code%20define%20bedroom&ei=fXXLTNesJ4aosQOdlbHjDg&usg=AFQjCNHPnxEuP4WRp4In0tOpq0et5dZlQQ&sig2=eInAL6C0o1RC3wL7yHhS-w


----------



## TJacobs

Also from our zoning code:

21.3 Definitions:

ZONING ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: The Zoning Enforcement Officer shall be the Building Commissioner and shall enforce this Chapter.

21.4(F):

F. PERMITS. No application for a building permit or other permit or license or for a certificate of occupancy, shall be approved by the Building Commissioner, and no permit or license shall be issued by any other Village department, which would authorize the use or change in use of any land or building contrary to the provisions of this Chapter, or the erection, moving, alteration, enlargement or occupancy of any building designed or intended to be used for a purpose or in a manner contrary to the provisions of this Chapter. That site construction, utility installation and grading shall not commence until a Site Development Permit has been issued by the Village and all offsite and onsite utilities serving the subject property shall be underground, and water and sanitary sewer permits have been issued by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency.

2006 IRC:

R106.1.1 Information on construction documents.

Construction documents shall be drawn upon suitable material. Electronic media documents are permitted to be submitted when approved by the building official. Construction documents shall be of sufficient clarity to indicate the location, nature and extent of the work proposed and show in detail that it will conform to the provisions of this code *and relevant laws, ordinances, rules and regulations, as determined by the building official.*

----------------------------------------------------------------

FWIW, I had nothing to do with writing the provisions into the zoning code. I just bothered to read them and apply them, because that's what they pay me to do. Your mileage may vary.


----------



## Jobsaver

TJacobs:

How do you apply the definition in your zoning code when perferming a plan review? There are some ambiguities as pointed out above, (are closets rooms?, are powder rooms rooms?, etc.)

There still exists an interpretation issue. How do you handle that in your ahd.


----------



## Mark K

When it says "as determined by the building official" it means as interpreted by the building official.  The building official cannot create new requirements because of the need for due process and the need for the requirements to be adopted by the governing body.

When interpreting the building code the building official is given considerable lattitude but he still must not step over the line and impose additional restrictions.  There is also the legal principle that when interpreting a regulation that is unclear, the unclearity shall be interpreted in favor of the applicant.

Nothing in what you posted would prevent the determination of the number of sleeping units based on the room labels.  Thus it is allowed.


----------



## Jobsaver

Mark K said:
			
		

> There is also the legal principle that when interpreting a regulation that is unclear, the unclearity shall be interpreted in favor of the applicant.QUOTE]The code admin sections of the code elaborate on the powers and duties of the BO sufficiently. I believe "as determined" and "as interpreted" mean the exact same thing reguarding R106.1.1.
> 
> What legal principle are you refering to that suggests that any lack of clarity shall be interpreted in favor of the applicant. The code calls for an appeals process by which a board might make the interpretation?


----------



## Mark K

I understand that the principle that uncertainty is interpreted in favor of the applicant is a matter of common law.  It is related to the rule that when interpreting a contract where there are two interpretations the party who did not draft the agreement gets to chose the interpretation he favors.  The important point is that a judge will apply this legal principle in deciding what is right.


----------



## Yankee

One does not mix zoning terms into the building code and visa versa.

It seems that we have gotten to  the point in this discussion that each "side" is not going to be swayed any further toward the other.


----------



## mark handler

Yankee said:
			
		

> It seems that we have gotten to  the point in this discussion that each "side" is not going to be swayed any further toward the other.


With some people, no amount of reasoning and/or information is going to change their thinking, even when they are wrong.


----------



## brudgers

Jobsaver said:
			
		

> Mark K said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There is also the legal principle that when interpreting a regulation that is unclear, the unclearity shall be interpreted in favor of the applicant.QUOTE]The code admin sections of the code elaborate on the powers and duties of the BO sufficiently. I believe "as determined" and "as interpreted" mean the exact same thing reguarding R106.1.1.
> 
> What legal principle are you refering to that suggests that any lack of clarity shall be interpreted in favor of the applicant. The code calls for an appeals process by which a board might make the interpretation?
Click to expand...

Yes, the applicant can breech "civility" and appeal your decision...and wait 30, 60 or however many days it takes to hold the hearing without a permit.

That's what a bully does.


----------



## TimNY

The only parallel I can draw in NY is that when there is ambiguity in a contract, it is interpreted against the party that drafted the contract.  It isn't written anywhere, it is been long established through case law.

If there is case law to establish the same principle when interpreting building code it would vary from state to state.  I don't know of any such established principle in NY, although certainly the number of cases regarding building code are minuscule compared to the number of cases regarding contract law.  If you dig enough you may find something.

The appeals process is there for a simple reason; one party thinks they're right, another party thinks they're wrong.  If the BO never made a mistake, you wouldn't need the process.  It seems like you are correct 100% of the time, or you are a bully.  I wouldn't give any lawsuit much of a chance based on a BO making a mistake, as long as it can be established he was reasonable.


----------



## fatboy

OK.....my thinking....I wouldn't put up with the "bullying". I am right now, sitting in my office,inf the house I designed and built. The office is in the middle of the house, no possible way to include a EERO, and has no SD. It has a closet, with 5 shelves for office supplies. If, for some reason that was not codified in some fashion, a plan reviewer  or inspector would have challenged my office? Damn straight I would have taken it to a BOA, or in our jurisdiction, not getting satifaction there, the City Council. To disallow this room would have changed the entire design of the house.

jobsaver.....I think by now you have figured out that you either need to amend your code to support your position, or abandon that position.


----------



## mark handler

Yes Fatboy, your office, acording to some on this board, would be, by their definition,  a bedroom. So would a family room, sun room and a walk in closet.


----------



## Jobsaver

fatboy said:
			
		

> jobsaver.....I think by now you have figured out that you either need to amend your code to support your position, or abandon that position.


Yes. This is my thinking now because of the constructive posts in this thread.


----------



## GHRoberts

Jobsaver said:
			
		

> Yes. This is my thinking now because of the constructive posts in this thread.


I appreciate that you are considering changing the code.

I think everyone in your area will appreciate clarification of this code issue.


----------



## High Desert

TimNY, if you had a 3 bedroom home, every room in excess of those 3 bedrooms, excluding closets, kitchens, baths and halls, would be a bedroom.


----------



## TimNY

High Desert said:
			
		

> TimNY, if you had a 3 bedroom home, every room in excess of those 3 bedrooms, excluding closets, kitchens, baths and halls, would be a bedroom.


I would tend to agree that you are correct.  That's not how I read it, but now that you put it that way..


----------

