[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6183574,"mediaKeyId","5096431-234eb6a6a55016e2bace96185cd23f98","parentId",5096431,"title","TAG adopts combined multiplex‑housing draft as working document; accessibility, structural and energy issues flagged","audioSeconds",851,"startMs",4719000,"endMs",5570000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5096431-234eb6a6a55016e2bace96185cd23f98&start=4719&end=5570","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5096431-234eb6a6a55016e2bace96185cd23f98/thumbnail_4719000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6183574/Washington/TAG-adopts-combined-multiplexhousing-draft-as-working-document-accessibility-structural-and-energy-issues-flagged","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6183574-a649065921b99d17e5926ea804de5ee4/orig.mp4?Expires=1775173824&Signature=K9cwS5F9AX24S-M8i~LK6Tn4d5-H~nB5ENDbTLDd87e-5yRTIYvvUBeB2tPv0kY4NR9olv9wGS5en7y4fNEZtAmwt0tHLrIGLpXA9FfIxIz5gsc1WH~I0OmezhgP~5dHKB5CC-rIuXeE~ExT~RdPihJKTJ5y6ZDPcE3Qz5wGaqRdwzO0gKj0trCvDMRIr2KbqyxAz03RBMbsAZsjHn8F3cspqpt~BIK1UNTxd4fjAdUWr9uRwGBIjj0qJKK3nQ8ke82qiguh8z1HJJy-F4doVdi9ieSt7BwuOxxaSOR0DMOM3jvbFWInXbUEhT-L9hp0q4aG0oq-438Ce10lBaqnpA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Building Code Council","date","2025-06-27T14:10:08Z","article","The Building Code Council's Single Exit/Multiplex Housing TAG voted June 26, 2025, to accept a combined multiplex‑housing proposal (authored by TAG participants) as the TAG's working document for further line‑by‑line review. The motion to adopt the combined draft passed by roll call vote.

Why it matters: the legislature directed the TAG to recommend amendments or additions to the Washington State Residential Code (IRC) to allow multiplex housing up to six dwelling units. TAG members emphasized that adoption choices must reconcile the RCW's affordability intent with life‑safety, accessibility and energy requirements that currently differ between residential and commercial code paths.

What the TAG approved: the combined draft sets a scope for multiplex housing, adds charging language to the residential code where applicable, and outlines unit‑separation, egress, sprinkler and fire‑department access expectations as a baseline for development. TAG members accepted the combined document as the baseline working file and asked participants to submit targeted editorial and technical comments before the next meeting.

Major issues flagged for follow‑up:
- Accessibility and unit triggers: the draft treats multiplex apartments as residential but will route accessibility requirements (chapter 11) where triggered by unit counts on a site; members asked for clarity on how multiple buildings on a single site will be counted toward accessibility triggers and type‑A/type‑B unit requirements. Richard Williams said the draft \"addresses a lot of the issues I had with some of the other ones,\" noting explicit references to residential accessibility provisions.

- Stories and structural scope: members requested immediate clarification from the legislature on whether the multiplex definition allows four‑story townhouses or is limited to up to three stories. Several members warned that moving to four stories would require additional structural provisions now outside the IRC (brace walls, structural paneling) and could push design responsibility toward the IBC.

- Sprinklers and fire separations: the draft requires unit separations and discusses sprinkler options; TAG members flagged the difference between residential sprinkler approaches (NFPA 13R/13D) and full 13 systems and asked fire experts to confirm which system(s) are appropriate for the proposed separations and story limits.

- Elevators, common areas and energy code: members asked for clarity on elevator triggers and whether multiplex projects follow the residential or commercial energy code; a proposal to allow designers to choose the residential or commercial energy path was noted and will be explored with the energy‑code TAG.

Formal action: the TAG adopted the combined multiplex draft as its working document and will collect edit proposals and technical comments in the shared working file. Volunteers (including John Hsu and others) will submit editorial and substantive edits for the next TAG meeting.

Ending note: adopting a single working document lets the TAG proceed to line‑by‑line votes and to document the justification for each technical choice, which TAG members requested so decisions can be reviewed and adjusted before the full Building Code Council sees the proposal.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","SBCC SEMH TAG Meeting - June 26, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Building Code Council TAG accepted a combined multiplex‑housing proposal as its working document on June 26, 2025, and identified remaining issues—accessibility triggers, structural/height questions (townhouse versus stacked flats), sprinkler/elevator approaches, and energy‑code alignment—for further editing and votes.","taxTitle","Building Code Council, Governor's Office - Boards & Commissions, Executive, Washington","taxId",24233,"location","Washington","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6183578,"TAG debates statewide single-exit requirement, tables action to develop fire‑department criteria",6744,317000,7061000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5096431-234eb6a6a55016e2bace96185cd23f98&start=317&end=7061","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5096431-234eb6a6a55016e2bace96185cd23f98/thumbnail_317000.jpg","/articles/6183578/Washington/TAG-debates-statewide-single-exit-requirement-tables-action-to-develop-firedepartment-criteria","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6183578-120008bb0155e3e827b6b31cd5927966/orig.mp4?Expires=1775173824&Signature=LIIag6aZC7x1lexHTD1KQIIqXGIKZEi~xECouMkAXnKH1heQNu~s05RymqEZNg~MVHtbJR8GAMzqdcF-70mULrWwN8~dW0yGU3d6bGSDciglg6ZhEdecKDODAWpY3l~2zXUnXn1pCNgnhCHof0DXrsAoMXgQFbh6SUhmb~O9H8TmIMsT4wgJOmo2JUUmYWHCd3Ht~scw9m5xMBCrMRC6msjF2KcMI40LCJjVxhJZG2DLyU3QjWBqMJlyQnIPr5snCu3S91RQvVadbBX0BEyT6TewGXr0Cd6NVpEEvQkjJ9dRrR8sQMb5GiGPuv47Kp5qaGWMcJHXb7evm-Y4woUM4w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Members of the Building Code Council's Single Exit/Multiplex Housing TAG met June 26, 2025, and debated whether single‑exit provisions required by the legislature must be incorporated as mandatory language in the statewide building code or could be implemented as an appendix that jurisdictions adopt locally. The TAG tabled further action and asked staff and fire‑service volunteers to draft specific fire‑department and water‑supply criteria for the next meeting.

Why it matters: the legislature directed the TAG to prepare code language allowing a single exit to serve multifamily residential structures up to six stories in some form. TAG members agreed the RCW requires the council to provide a statewide mechanism but disagreed over how to balance life‑safety protections, local firefighting capacity, and the bill's cost‑reduction intent.

Most urgent decisions and next steps: the TAG voted to table the single‑exit discussion and directed volunteers from the fire service and code officials to develop proposed criteria on professional fire‑department presence, response times, water supply/fire flow, and related mitigation (sprinkler systems, stair fire‑rating, smoke control) for review at the next meeting (July 15, 2025). That follow‑up will inform whether the single‑exit language is placed in the mandatory body of the code or implemented as a mandatory appendix referenced by the model code.

Key details from the meeting:
- Legislative directive and code cycle: TAG members referenced the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) language that directs TAG work and cited the next code cycle timeline: code text to be finalized by July 2026 and effective November 2026; the TAG set internal drafting targets (discussion noted a Jan. 31 target to finish working text and a suggested two‑month public comment window). (Speaker: Roger Haringa)

- Mandatory vs. appendix approach: TAG chair Roger Haringa said the TAG should proceed under the assumption that language will be \"in the building code that is a requirement throughout the state,\" while other members noted that appendices can be adopted locally and that moving an appendix into mandatory statewide language would require additional technical requirements to ensure public safety.

- Fire department capability and water supply: several members, including members representing fire interests, warned that making single‑exit provisions mandatory statewide raises unresolved questions about local firefighting capacity, aerial apparatus availability and staffing, water supply and fire flow, and volunteer vs. professional department capabilities. Mike Messer (fire service representative) emphasized firefighting limits and said the group must codify the conditions under which single‑exit buildings are safe. Jeremy Moore (TAG member) warned that many counties lack ladder trucks and that volunteer departments vary widely in capability.

- Protection and mitigation measures under discussion: TAG members discussed requiring enhanced stair fire ratings and smoke control/pressurization, and debated sprinkler options (full NFPA 13 systems versus residential NFPA 13R/13D solutions). Fire experts advised that 13R and full 13 systems are hydraulically different and that mixing system types in one building is technically complex.

- Performance‑based versus prescriptive approaches: some TAG members proposed documenting performance objectives (for example, limiting exposure of the single exit to untenable conditions) and using a performance framework to decide prescriptive choices. Others argued a full performance‑based rewrite exceeds the TAG's available time and recommended using performance language only to justify prescriptive provisions.

What the TAG decided (formal action): the TAG tabled the single‑exit discussion for detailed follow‑up. Volunteers from the fire service and code community were asked to prepare draft criteria (fire‑department presence/response, water supply/fire flow, sprinkler approach, stair rating/smoke control) for the next meeting.

Ending note: TAG members agreed the state RCW directs work on single exit but that to make the requirement mandatory statewide the TAG must specify the operational conditions (fire‑department and water‑supply benchmarks) under which single‑exit buildings may be allowed. The TAG will revisit the topic at its next scheduled meeting (July 15, 2025).","At a June 26, 2025 meeting of the Building Code Council's Single Exit/Multiplex Housing TAG, members debated whether single-exit provisions must be mandatory statewide, and paused further action to develop specific fire‑department capability and water‑supply criteria for statewide application.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

TAG adopts combined multiplex‑housing draft as working document; accessibility, structural and energy issues flagged

TAG debates statewide single-exit requirement, tables action to develop fire‑department criteria