RECOMMENDED STUDY / ACTION 7/15/17

INTRODUCTION / REASON:

During each new code cycle there are always changes that need to be interpreted for implementation by the contractors and design professionals and enforcement by the building officials, plans examiners and inspectors. It is common to hear we don’t have to do that in “Y” jurisdiction or that’s not the way “X” jurisdiction is doing that. We understand that the Building Official has the final determination as to the interpretation and enforcement of the code. However, this creates frustration on the part of everyone involved and causes friction between the enforcement personnel, contractors and design professionals, when different interpretations and enforcement occur around the State. Most Building Officials, as well as Contractors, Architects and Engineers would welcome guidance that they could fall back on to have consistency across the State to avoid this type of issue.

SCOPE:

The proposed scope of this recommendation is to provide a guideline/directive document for the implementation, enforcement and compliance to code changes created in the 6^th edition of the Florida Building Code Scheduled to take effect on December 31, 2017 as well as changes to the code to be implemented by the Florida Legislative actions.

This would allow for the uniform implementation, enforcement and compliance of these requirements throughout the State of Florida by creating a document that would be considered as mandatory once approved by the Florida Building Commission.

TECHNICIAL APPROACH:

The approach to completion of this task would be for the Florida Building Commission to establish a committee to be comprised of all stake holders involved in the implementation, compliance and enforcement of the new changes/requirements to the code. This would include but not be limited to building officials, contractors, design professionals, fire officials etc.

ESTIMATED PROJECT COST:

This would be intended to be a volunteer committee from the stake holder groups to assist in the development of this document to benefit all stake holders. It would be anticipated that a task of this magnitude would benefit from three (3) face to face meetings, two (2), minimum, one to start and one at the end. The cost would be for a meeting space and staff time to facilitate the meetings and produce the documents. The other work can be handled through email and conference call or webcast meetings to save on cost. I would ask that staff develop the cost for the items noted above.

Respectfully submitted by Joe Crum, Mechanical TAC member per approval by the Mechanical TAC.