Laserfiche WebLink
<br />V. PCS <br />LANNING AND OMMUNITY ERVICES <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />A. BUILDING CODES <br /> <br /> <br /> 1. COST ACCOUNTABILITY <br /> <br />When legislative action results in code changes that require local administration, there <br />should be State accountability for the additional financial resources that will be required. <br />Funding should be identified before enactment to compensate for such items as personnel <br />training, information and training for the public, and added review. <br /> <br />2. STREAMLINING <br /> <br />Building codes have become a complex burden for jurisdictions administering the codes <br />and for those in the building industry. Certain actions would simplify the codes for all <br />parties, making their administration more cost-effective and maintaining the integrity of <br />their intent to promote public health, welfare and safety. Those simplification actions <br />include: <br /> <br /> a. Eliminate or severely curtail the number of amendments that the State of Oregon <br />adds to the model codes. <br /> <br /> b. Work with the Oregon Building Officials Association (OBOA) and the <br />International Code Council Inc. (ICC) on code changes rather than <br />interpretations. ICC, a new organization of model code writing agencies, will be <br />the writer of Oregon's model codes. Focusing on code interpretations rather than <br />code changes makes proactive building codes administration more difficult. <br /> <br />a. Support improvements to State Building Codes that streamline without <br /> <br />jeopardizing health, safety or integrity or infrastructure. <br /> <br /> <br /> 3. STATEWIDE UNIFORMITY <br />City of Eugene Legislative Policies, 2007 Session <br />With IGR Mtg 10/17 and 10/26 Amendments C:\Documents and Settings\ceexelf\Local Settings\Temporary Internet <br />Files\OLK10B\LegPol2007Sesxx1.doc <br />Updated on: 11/6/2006 By: Last saved by ceexmfw <br /> 35 <br /> <br />