You asked (1) for the history of the “threshold” building law’s applicability to state buildings and (2) how other states deal with permitting and inspections for state building projects.

This report addresses only the threshold law’s history. We will answer your question about other states’ practices in a subsequent report.

SUMMARY

Current law requires new construction and additions to most state buildings over a statutorily set “threshold” size to receive a building permit and a certificate of occupancy (CO) from the state building inspector. The threshold limits are (1) four stories, (2) 60-feet high, (3) a clear span of 150 feet wide, (4) 150,000 square feet of floor space, or (5) occupancy by 1,000 or more people.

Neither a building permit or a CO is needed for a newly constructed or altered state building below the threshold limits. Before such a building can be used, the agency responsible for the project must to certify to the building inspector that the structure complies with the State Building and Fire Safety Codes. The law requires the building inspector to inspect new construction and alterations (CGS § 29-252a).

This law was first enacted in 1988 in response to the 1987 collapse of L’Ambience Plaza in Bridgeport. A committee formed to study that catastrophe recommended, among other items, that building officials give extra scrutiny to all construction projects, public and private, above a “threshold” size. It also recommended that the state building inspector be required to review plans for all state building projects, inspect them for code compliance, and issue building permits and COs for them. At the time, the law required only that the agency responsible for the construction certify that a project complied with applicable codes.

The legislature adopted these recommendations but delayed the provisions governing state projects until July 1989 to give the state building inspector time to assemble the staff to perform these and other added responsibilities. Then, beginning in 1990, it enacted a series of laws that (1) limited to threshold projects the requirement that all new construction and alterations of state buildings receive building permits and COs and (2) postponed, then eliminated, the inspector’s permitting and CO authority over nonthreshold state projects. Budget considerations seem to have been the principal reason for these actions.

GENESIS OF PERMIT REQUIREMENTS FOR STATE BUILDINGS

The threshold building law was enacted in response to the 1987 collapse of L’Ambience Plaza in Bridgeport. Governor O’Neill appointed the Building Construction Advisory Committee to review Connecticut’s building procedures and make recommendations to assure that a similar catastrophe would not occur again. The committee’s many recommendations included requiring an independent engineering review of the plans of projects above a “threshold” size and, as needed, field inspections and laboratory tests of construction materials. This recommendation and the threshold criteria applied to all construction projects, public and private.

Several of the committee’s other recommendations dealt with the construction of state buildings. At the time, the law required only that the agency responsible for the construction certify that a project complied with applicable codes. The committee called for:

1. repealing the exemption of state buildings from code inspection requirements;

2. giving the State Building Inspector’s Office jurisdiction over the construction on all state buildings, including inspecting them for code compliance; and

3. making the Public Works Department (DPW) responsible for (a) supervising the construction of all state building regardless of which agency or branch of government was constructing it and (b) seeking building permits and COs from the building inspector.

INITIAL LAW (PA 88-359)

PA 88-359, “An Act Implementing the Recommendations of the Governor’s Building Construction Advisory Committee,” required the state building inspector to (1) issue building permits for state buildings, including threshold buildings, constructed or altered by Executive Branch agencies other than DOT, (2) inspect the work on them for code compliance, and (3) issue COs. These provisions took effect July 1, 1989. The bill’s history shows a series of revisions that reduced the scope of the building inspector’s jurisdiction from that recommended by the committee and postponed implementation of that jurisdiction.

Raised Bill

PA 88-359 originated in the Public Safety Committee as HB 5782. The original bill:

1. defined “threshold” buildings and set additional review requirements for them;

2. required the state building inspector to issue a building permit and CO for constructing new and altering existing state buildings;

3. prohibited occupancy of any state building without a CO from the building inspector;

4. eliminated the responsibility for the state agency contracting for the work to certify to the building inspector that its plans complied with applicable building and fire safety codes;

5. gave the inspector 30 days to review the agency’s plans and specifications and issue the permit; and

6. required, rather than permitted, the inspector to inspect all construction and alteration of state buildings.

These provisions were to take effect October 1, 1988.

Public Hearings

At Public Safety Committee hearings on the bill, both Leo Belval, the state building inspector, and David Paige, deputy state fire marshal, stated that the October 1, 1988 starting date was unattainable. Belval suggested delaying implementation until October 1, 1989.

Under then-existing law, DPW reviewed agencies’ plans and specifications for code compliance. Its staff of approximately 60 people included five certified building officials and one certified fire marshal among its 20 plan reviewers and 35 to 40 inspectors (who inspected mainly for contract, not code, compliance). Paige believed the state building inspector would have to assemble a comparable staff, which would require one to two years lead time. DPW estimated this would cost approximately $ 3 million annually. It opposed the bill on the grounds that the building inspector’s review would have an adverse effect on DPW’s ability to complete projects on time.

The Judicial Branch opposed the bill because it would reverse a1985 act exempting Judicial from Executive Branch oversight.

Substitute Bill

The Public Safety Committee reported out a substitute bill that altered the original bill by:

1. exempting the Judicial and Legislative branches and Department of Transportation (DOT) buildings;

2. making DPW the central agency dealing with the building inspector on building permits for state buildings by requiring it to apply for permits, submit the building plans and specifications, and certify that they complied with building and fire safety codes; and

3. requiring the agency contracting for the work to certify code compliance to the building inspector when it applied for a CO.

Amendments

The House amended sHB 5782 to, among other things, postpone implementing the provisions related to state buildings until July 1, 1989.

POSTPONING IMPLEMENTATION AND LIMITING SCOPE

PA 88-359 gave the State Building Inspector’s Office many new responsibilities in addition to those concerning state buildings. Soon after the act took effect, concerns arose over the office’s ability to implement it and the effects slow implementation might have on state building projects. Implementation problems and these concerns were exacerbated by (1) the state’s deteriorating financial condition, which led to decreases in the state workforce due to an early retirement incentive and position freezes in many state agencies, including the Public Safety Department (DPS), and (2) a Correction Department building initiative to address prison overcrowding.

Beginning in 1990, the legislature enacted a series of laws that (1) limited to threshold-size projects the requirement that all new construction and alterations of state buildings receive building permits and COs from, and be inspected by, the state building inspector and (2) postponed the inspector’s jurisdiction over smaller state projects.

PA 90-153

PA 90-153 limited the state building inspector’s authority over state building to threshold buildings and postponed until July 1, 1991 the requirement for nonthreshold buildings to obtain a building permit and CO. Again, its history shows a series of attempts to reduce the building inspector’s jurisdiction and postpone the law’s implementation largely because of budget considerations.

Raised Bill. In 1990, Governor O’Neill introduced HB 5159 (which became PA 90-153) to:

1. limit to threshold buildings the building inspector’s authority to review plans and issue building permits;

2. completely exempt smaller projects under DPW jurisdiction from the requirement that they receive a CO from the inspector (essentially eliminating the inspector’s authority over smaller projects since DPW had jurisdiction over most Executive Branch projects, and PA 88-359 already exempted DOT and Judicial and Legislative Branch projects);

3. eliminate the mandate for the inspector to inspect all state building projects for code compliance, making this a discretionary activity; and

4. deem a permit application approved if the inspector failed to act within his statutory deadline (30 days, which the bill permitted him to extend to 60 days).

Public Hearings. Both Paige, the deputy fire marshal, and Donald Vigneau, the new state building inspector, objected to this proposal. Paige asserted that the law’s review standards should be maintained, but he recognized that the implementation date could be “rolled back” until the committee determined that “appropriate resources are available” to enable DPS to begin. Vigneau testified that he understood that the state’s financial “crisis” precluded his being able to hire enough staff to fully implement the law. He agreed to limit his immediate role to threshold buildings and proposed that the committee annually review the situation to determine when full implementation should begin.

Substitute Bill. The committee’s substitute bill (1) postponed until June 30, 1992, rather than eliminated, implementing the building permit requirement for nonthreshold buildings; (2) required the committee annually to review the implementation dates to determine the need for revisions; and (3) contained all of the governor’s other provisions.

Final Bill. The House amended the bill to (1) postpone for one year (until June 30, 1991), rather than the two the committee proposed, implementation of the permit and CO requirements for nonthreshold buildings, (2) reinstate the inspector’s inspection mandate, and (3) eliminate both the inspector’s ability to extend his permit-issuing deadline and the provision deeming applications approved if he did not act by that deadline.

PA 91-84

This act extended the exemption from building permit and CO requirements for nonthreshold buildings until July 1, 1993.

PA 92-55

This act exempted state buildings that do not need a building permit (i. e. , nonthreshold buildings) from the requirement that they receive a certificate of occupancy from the state building inspector. It required the agency constructing or altering a building to certify that it complied with applicable codes.

PA 93-200

This act extended the exemption from building permit and CO requirements for nonthreshold buildings until July 1, 1995.

PA 95-157

This act extended the exemption for nonthreshold buildings until July 1, 1997.

PA 97-11, June 18 Special Session

This act extended the exemption for nonthreshold buildings until July 1, 1999. It also (1) made the permit requirement applicable to building additions, rather than alterations and (2) reduced the circumstances in which a permit had to be obtained by making the requirement applicable only to projects that required an independent structural review. Such review is not needed for minor, nonthreshold alterations.

PA 98-263

This act extended the exemption for nonthreshold buildings until July 1, 2000.

PA 99-206

This act eliminated the requirement that nonthreshold buildings receive a building permit. The bill that became the act (HB 6790) was a governor’s bill to implement the budget. In discussing the bill, Representative Dargan, the Public Safety Committee chairman, said it “eliminates the phase-in of review of smaller projects which will basically save the state money. ”

SS: dw