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.