Egress code

[Marcel R. Cyr]

Peter;
Approximately 15% of Maine’s municipalities (representing more than 50% of Maine’s citizens) have voluntarily adopted and enforce building codes. These municipalities have generally adopted BOCA codes and generally enforce the codes with local or shared building code enforcement officers that perform post-construction inspections. However, municipalities generally do not enforce the energy component of their adopted family of codes, but focus on health and safety codes. Thus, it is likely that there is minimal municipal infrastructure addressing energy standards and their enforcement.

Earlier Versions of Codes. Finally, nationally accepted codes exist that are being superceded by IECC or NFPA, but that were adopted years ago by various states and municipalities. These include the widely used Model Energy Code or MEC (produced by the Council of American Building Officials, or CABO), the Southern Building Codes (SBC), the National Building Codes (codes produced by the Building Officials and Code Administrators International or BOCA), and the Uniform Building Codes (UBC). In turn, BOCA (which is the code adopted by most Maine communities that have adopted codes) incorporates the MEC. All these codes are described as being similar to, or consistent with, the more recently-emerging I-Codes. BOCA, SBC and UBC have merged to become the ICC. The MEC, which is still the adopted energy code in approximately 16 states, may be considered simply an earlier version of the IECC energy code.

addition, codes generally are living documents, with a process whereby stakeholders can recommend changes and all interested persons comment before incorporation into the codes. The Model Energy Codes (MEC) and now the I-Codes are on a three-year revision cycle, whereby the adopting organization amends the codes and states in turn decide whether to adopt the newest version. MEC has 1995 and 1998 versions. The I-Codes have 2000 and 2003 versions.

Local Building Inspector

State Agency

Privatization

Self-certification to homeowner

Self-certification to state agency

Civil penalties

Local inspectors responsible for other codes and know what is happening in their towns

Significant government infrastructure must be established

State-supported certification process must be established

No administration required

Some government infrastructure must be established.

Court involvement required

Significant cost, borne by town (local taxes)

Significant cost, borne by State (state taxes)

Cost, borne by builder/owner

No cost unless homeowner wants to verify

Lower cost than other state-supported methods

Significant effort required by owner

Inspection quality varies

Consistent inspection quality

Consistent inspection quality

Requires knowledgeable builders

Requires knowledgeable builders

Requires knowledgeable owners

High likelihood of compliance: procedures already in place

Likelihood of compliance

Likelihood of compliance

Risk of intentional non-compliance if homeowner does not desire efficient building and no oversite

Some risk of intentional non-compliance

Risk of consumer difficulty in bringing and winning suit

Responsibility borne by town

Responsibility borne by State

Responsibility borne by State

Responsibility borne by builder

Responsibility borne primarily by builder

Responsibility borne by building owner

Hope this helps or confuses you more. Ha. Ha.
Hey, I have heard of tread drift, but I think we just put the frosting on the cake. ha. ha.

Marcel

[Peter C. Russell]

Thanks Marcel, yeah I'm confused but I'll use it to my advantage!!!

I'll let you know what happens tomorrow.

Thanks again.

[Peter C. Russell]

Marcel, got shot down today, the section I referred to was for change of use not change of structure.

Back to the 133 page zoning ordanance to see if I can find an exemption.

[Marcel R. Cyr]

Originally Posted by prussell

Marcel, got shot down today, the section I referred to was for change of use not change of structure.

Back to the 133 page zoning ordanance to see if I can find an exemption.

Figured that much with them using 133 pages to choose from.

If the change of use is what they are basing this thing on, I wish you luck.

I am afraid as I said before, fighting City Hall is futile.

I have always said when one fails at something, try and try again. ha. ha.

Marcel

[Peter C. Russell]

Well, no luck. Your right Marcel, they have their bases covered.

I guess I have to go for the varience.