# existing housing codes



## codeworks (Mar 12, 2012)

we currently do not have an "existing housing code" for use or adopted as a guideline for the  standard from which to work, when it comes to looking at existing, "up to standard" , substandard or delapidated dwellings.  what are you all using, and how are your (what have been) succcesses and failures , (or downfalls if you're experiencing any) if you will,  working out. are you using the IPMC ? IEBC, UHC ?  thank you  for responses . this is a great place to get good information and opinions/ideas


----------



## Alias (Mar 12, 2012)

Have used 1997 Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings.  I'm now using the IPMC, CA Health & Safety Code, and the City Code's nuisance abatement chapter.  I have a wide variety of nuisances/abatements and they don't all fall under one code.


----------



## Papio Bldg Dept (Mar 12, 2012)

We looked at the IPMC, but have not officially adopted it.  We currently use the IBC, IRC & IEBC to evaluate existing habitable structures.  We only evaluate properties and structures that generate complaints, and typically will reference most interior and exterior issues between owners and tenants as civil issues to be resolved legally.  If we evaluate a residence as uninhabitable, the residents will no longer be able to stay in the residence (which has happened, and has been a joint evaluation by fire, health and building departments...sometimes law enforcement).  Not a perfect system, but not sure the IPMC would be either, it would just give us more teeth for determing the status of a structure.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Mar 12, 2012)

Still use the 1997 Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings. We used it once in the last 12 years. Legal does not like the IPMC because it is just that a maintenance code and we do not want to be in the business of regulating the maintenance of single family homes.

The 18 examples of a dangerous building in the definitions of the abatement code is what we would use to abate a building.


----------



## Daddy-0- (Mar 12, 2012)

We use the IPMC and it is very effective for most situations. You can adopt chapters of it if you are not comfortable with certain "big brother" sections.


----------



## TheCommish (Mar 12, 2012)

Without quoting chapter  and verse, here in Massachusetts the 2009 IRC with amendments apply from my office. It requires the owner to maintain all the equipment and the residence in serviceable condition, and makes a statement the building is assume to have meet the code that is was constructed under. A note we have had a state wide building code since 1975, that leave hundred of structures being built prior to the adoption of the state wide e code. Some of the urban areas had their own code prior to that.

Now for the kicker the health code, enforced by a separate department has minimum health and habitation standards for rental property, from single family homes, 3 deckers, up to multiple apartments that reference  the current version of the building code. So a railing height that may have been OK when installed is now a violation of the health code, which the health inspector cites as a violation and the property owner now need a building permit to replace the railing up to the current code.

Neither of us go looking for violations and basically only act on complaints by someone who has access to the building, not the tenant that is moving out and want us to get back at the landlord.

The operative though here is if it is maintained don’t fool with it, if you do work on it bring it up to current code with some limintations.


----------



## ICE (Mar 12, 2012)

Some of the threads that I've seen here with the existing building codes are downright scary.  There's one out there that will make you install sprinklers if you get a new mailbox.   All I can say is be careful what you wish for.


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Mar 12, 2012)

ICE said:
			
		

> All I can say is be careful what you wish for.


Absolutely; this has been a subject of concern in my local chapter meetings on what authority can maintenance and condemnation be enforced without being in violation of property rights.

Francis


----------



## WAW SWPA (Mar 13, 2012)

I am trying to understand this IPMC, who enforces it? Is it under the zoning dept./ officer? Or is it under the bldg. dept. and do the persons conducting the bldg. insp. aspect need to be certified bldg. inspectors or just some local appointee? This gets somewhat murky in my little corner of the world. Can the municipal employee just be apointed to enforce this code with out any training and/or other  credentials?


----------



## Francis Vineyard (Mar 13, 2012)

WAW SWPA said:
			
		

> I am trying to understand this IPMC, who enforces it? Is it under the zoning dept./ officer? Or is it under the bldg. dept. and do the persons conducting the bldg. insp. aspect need to be certified bldg. inspectors or just some local appointee? This gets somewhat murky in my little corner of the world. Can the municipal employee just be apointed to enforce this code with out any training and/or other credentials?


In our little corner of the world both the Building Official and Inspectors are certified in IPMC; and is discipline in the 4th amendment. I'm sure other localities are different whereas the case may be the local police officer may enforce owing to the culture of the area in question.

http://publicecodes.citation.com/icod/ipmc/2012/icod_ipmc_2012_effectiveuse.htm?bu=IC-P-2012-000010&bu2=IC-P-2012-000019

Francis


----------



## fatboy (Mar 13, 2012)

"Can the municipal employee just be apointed to enforce this code with out any training and/or other credentials?"

Yes, as long as they are sworn. We enforce the IPMC, sans zoning, code enforcement issues, amended out as our Municipal Code/Code Enforcement handles that end.


----------



## Alias (Mar 13, 2012)

An addendum to my earlier comments.  I try to use just the CA H&S Code wherever possible.  It is very specific and similar to the '97 Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings.  I am currently using state code to record 4 vacant substandard shacks at the recorder's office.

As to enforcement and who does it, I do because I am a one person department.  I have had a couple of classes offered by CACEO (CA Code Enforcement Officers).  I am not sworn and don't want to be.  I grab the environmental health officer when it is a trash/rodent complaint as they can cite the owner.

I do not go out looking for problems, I only respond to a written complaint.


----------



## codeworks (Mar 13, 2012)

"there's one out there that wil make you install sprinklers if you get a new mail box" please give code publisher , edition, year and section, i'm interested in this one


----------



## ICE (Mar 13, 2012)

codeworks said:
			
		

> "there's one out there that wil make you install sprinklers if you get a new mail box" please give code publisher , edition, year and section, i'm interested in this one


Sorry but I don't know any of that.  There's a treat here named Mr. Softy and he uses it.


----------



## codeworks (Mar 13, 2012)

your point is ?


----------



## rnapier (Mar 14, 2012)

Here in NJ we have a pretty encompassing and confussing code that works fairly well. It modifies the IRC, IBC, NEC and so on. A 163 pages. Here is a link http://www.nj.gov/dca/divisions/codes/codreg/pdf_regs/njac_5_23_6.pdf


----------



## gbhammer (Mar 14, 2012)

Papio Bldg Dept said:
			
		

> We looked at the IPMC, but have not officially adopted it.  We currently use the IBC, IRC & IEBC to evaluate existing habitable structures.  We only evaluate properties and structures that generate complaints, and typically will reference most interior and exterior issues between owners and tenants as civil issues to be resolved legally.  If we evaluate a residence as uninhabitable, the residents will no longer be able to stay in the residence (which has happened, and has been a joint evaluation by fire, health and building departments...sometimes law enforcement).  Not a perfect system, but not sure the IPMC would be either, it would just give us more teeth for determing the status of a structure.


same here. The powers that be wanted us to be the grass police for a minute but once they read the IPMC, and after we revived them they said no way.


----------



## JBI (Mar 14, 2012)

NYS adopted the IPMC with enhancements, same as we did for the other I-codes. If property maintenence is an issue in your jurisdiction, it can be a valuable tool. Proper use of that tool is essential.


----------



## codeworks (Mar 14, 2012)

we have "pocket neighboor hoods" or pockets of neighborhoods, that are in real disrepair and need upgrading. trouble is currently we have no standard to work from for existing buildings. writing tickets or notices of violation won't do a thing unless we have a palce to come from. i appreciate all the input, keep it coming.


----------



## gbhammer (Mar 14, 2012)

codeworks said:
			
		

> we have "pocket neighboor hoods" or pockets of neighborhoods, that are in real disrepair and need upgrading. trouble is currently we have no standard to work from for existing buildings. writing tickets or notices of violation won't do a thing unless we have a palce to come from. i appreciate all the input, keep it coming.


We wrote and adopted our own odinance for violations, dangerous building, unsafe structures, and meth cleanups


----------



## Papio Bldg Dept (Mar 14, 2012)

codeworks said:
			
		

> we have "pocket neighboor hoods" or pockets of neighborhoods, that are in real disrepair and need upgrading. trouble is currently we have no standard to work from for existing buildings. writing tickets or notices of violation won't do a thing unless we have a palce to come from. i appreciate all the input, keep it coming.


Administratively, and even inter-departmentally, we struggle with the thin line between too much and not enough.  In instances where we are unable to respond to citizen complaints, we direct the citizens to their city council member, as they have direct influence on the both the ordinances that we are able to enforce, and to some degree how actively we enforce them (remembering to be consistent).  We have found that having an anonymous complaint hotline has both advantages and disadvantages, that usually end up with being called out to witness what is really a civil issues between neighbors.  If you have legal staff that are accessible, you may want to sit down with them and key administrators to find out what your legal limits in order to set written enforcement policies, and/or work on new ordinances that can address your needs.

If we have to do work on a property, that work request is sent out for bid.  The work is completed and the property owner (often times a bank) is notified.  After a certain time-frame a lien is filed against the property, to be paid prior transfer of ownership.

Good luck.


----------



## gbhammer (Mar 14, 2012)

Be careful that when taking an anonymous complaint to always let the person know that if an inspector is sent to a sight that he will seek out and post any visible violations with in the local area of the complaint, which may involve the caller’s residence. It is very important to be consistent in pursuing all the violations in the area and not just the structure under a complaint call.


----------



## inspectorgadget (Apr 9, 2012)

i like some of the responses about not looking for violations , i act on complaints also .  i have some guys in the dept. that get a badge & puff up their chest & think there fricken god . we have whats called a resale inspection in our town & when someone goes to sell there house or building we do a inspection . we make them bring the building into compliance , its more of a life saftey issue , smoke , carbon , gfi & so on . this way we either get the building owner to fix the problems or the buyer can sign a agreement that he will have the violations corrected with in 30 days of the closing & that will get them to closing , then we make them put up a escrow & when they pass inspection they get there money back


----------



## BSSTG (Apr 9, 2012)

inspectorgadget said:
			
		

> i like some of the responses about not looking for violations , i act on complaints also .  i have some guys in the dept. that get a badge & puff up their chest & think there fricken god . we have whats called a resale inspection in our town & when someone goes to sell there house or building we do a inspection . we make them bring the building into compliance , its more of a life saftey issue , smoke , carbon , gfi & so on . this way we either get the building owner to fix the problems or the buyer can sign a agreement that he will have the violations corrected with in 30 days of the closing & that will get them to closing , then we make them put up a escrow & when they pass inspection they get there money back


Greetings

So much for the old addage "buying as is". I bet the real estate brokers like that rule. Glad we don't have regs like that around here.

BS


----------

