Ohio Administrative Code Title 4101:13 - Board of Building Appeals
Overview of Ohio Administrative Code Title 4101:13 – Board of Building Appeals
Purpose:
The Board of Building Appeals (BBA) in Ohio is a state-level administrative body that hears appeals related to enforcement of the Ohio Building Code, Fire Code, Elevator Code, and related regulations. Its main role is to review enforcement actions (such as citations, stop-work orders, or demolition orders) to ensure they comply with law and proper interpretation of the codes. The Board does not create policy but examines whether enforcement was legally correct and whether strict compliance imposes unnecessary hardship.
Key Features:
Appeals Filing: Must be filed within 30 days of the enforcement action.
Hearings: The Board reviews evidence, permits witnesses, and considers written submissions.
Authority: The Board can affirm, modify, or reverse enforcement orders.
Review Criteria: Decisions are based on whether enforcement was contrary to law, a fair interpretation of the codes, or would impose unnecessary hardship on the owner without benefiting public safety.
Limits: The Board mainly reviews state code enforcement, not purely local building codes, unless the local enforcement is tied to state codes.
Detailed Case Examples
1. Powlette v. Board of Building Appeals (Fire & Building Code Enforcement)
Facts:
Owners of a barn used for agritourism and public events were cited for fire code and building code violations. They argued their structure was exempt under the agricultural exemption.
Issue:
Does the agricultural exemption apply to a building used for public gatherings?
Decision:
The Board upheld the citations, stating the structure’s public assembly use removed the exemption.
Significance:
Demonstrates that exemptions apply only based on actual use; multi-use structures may be subject to code enforcement.
2. Rabkewych v. Cleveland Board of Building Standards & Appeals (Demolition Order)
Facts:
A property owner appealed a demolition order for an unsafe building, claiming the Board erred in not granting more time for repairs.
Issue:
Was the demolition order lawful and reasonable?
Decision:
The Board and the courts upheld the demolition order because the building posed a safety hazard.
Significance:
Shows that BBA decisions are generally upheld when public safety is a concern, even if the owner argues hardship.
3. Oberlin v. Ohio Board of Building Standards (Certification Issue)
Facts:
The Board decertified a municipal building department for misapplication of state building codes.
Issue:
Was the decertification lawful?
Decision:
Courts reviewed the Board’s findings and assessed whether actions were supported by law.
Significance:
Highlights that administrative oversight of local building departments is part of the BBA’s broader regulatory environment, with appeal pathways to courts.
4. Agricultural Exemption vs. Building Code (Hypothetical Based on Real Principles)
Facts:
A farmer claims a storage building is exempt from the Ohio Building Code because it is primarily used for agriculture.
Issue:
Does multi-use (storage + occasional public use) affect exemption eligibility?
Decision:
The BBA could rule that the building is subject to code enforcement because public use negates the exemption.
Significance:
Shows the Board evaluates actual usage, not just the label or purpose claimed by the owner.
5. Stop-Work and Remediation Orders (General Principle)
Facts:
A building inspector issued a stop-work order for unsafe conditions during construction.
Issue:
Is the stop-work order lawful, or does it impose unnecessary hardship?
Decision:
The Board assesses whether the order is consistent with law and whether strict enforcement would cause undue hardship. Typically, safety concerns outweigh hardship claims.
Significance:
The Board’s authority focuses on balancing legal compliance and public safety with fairness to owners.
6. Historic Structure Variance Appeal (Illustrative Example)
Facts:
An owner of a historic building requested a variance for code compliance, arguing structural changes would destroy historic features.
Issue:
Can the Board grant a variance without compromising safety?
Decision:
The BBA can grant partial variance if safety is maintained while preserving historic elements.
Significance:
Demonstrates the Board’s discretion in granting variances where strict code enforcement creates unnecessary hardship, as long as public safety is not compromised.
Appeal Pathway in Ohio
Enforcement Order Issued: A building inspector or fire official issues a citation, stop-work order, or demolition notice.
Appeal to Board of Building Appeals: Filed within 30 days; Board reviews evidence and arguments.
Board Decision: Can affirm, reverse, or modify the order based on legal correctness and hardship considerations.
Judicial Review: Aggrieved parties may appeal the Board’s decision to the Ohio Court of Common Pleas and subsequently to appellate courts.
Key Takeaways
The BBA ensures state building and fire code enforcement is lawful and fair.
Exemptions (like agricultural use) depend on actual building use.
Public safety usually outweighs hardship claims.
Variances may be granted if strict enforcement creates unnecessary hardship without endangering safety.
Appeals from the BBA go to courts for review under Ohio administrative law.
RELATED Blog
comments