2006 International Property Maintenance Code
The Property Maintenance Code is a nationally recognized standard in which the City can regulate the minimum health and safety requirements for existing buildings, structures, and property. To provide guidance for inspections, the City of Edwardsville has adopted the 2006 International Property Maintenance Code, which establishes standards for the upkeep of neighborhoods and prevents public nuisances such as accumulation of trash, high weeds, and derelict vehicles.
2006 international property maintenance code
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. This 2006 Virginia Maintenance Code contains substantial copyrighted material from the 2006 International Property Maintenance Code, Third Printing, which is a copyrighted work owned by the International Code Council, Inc.
Adopting the new building codes will allow the City of Mansfield to advance from the 2006 edition of international base codes to the 2018 edition. A link to local amendments of each of the codes is provided in the following documents:
The City of Hopkins Property Maintenance Ordinance (City Code Section 8-280 (PDF)) adopted the 2006 International Property Maintenance Code. It includes all aspects of the building from the structure to electrical, plumbing, and mechanical and fire concerns. You can examine a copy of the International Property Maintenance Code at the Inspections Department in City Hall.
Other City of Hopkins ordinances that address property maintenance issues such as littering, open storage, dog issues, and nuisances are the Nuisance Ordinance (City Code Chapter 28 - Nuisances (PDF)), Animal Ordinances (City Code Chapter 6 - Animals (PDF)), and Solid Waste Management Ordinance (City Code Chapter 34 (PDF)).
In 1972, BOCA, SBCCI, and ICBO created the Council of American Building Officials (CABO) to prepare a national building code for residential construction.[4] CABO's One and Two Family Dwelling Code was adopted by only a handful of U.S. jurisdictions; the rest preferred to stick with the regional building codes.[4] In 1994, BOCA, SBCCI, and ICBO merged to form the International Code Council (ICC) in order to develop a comprehensive set of building codes that would have no regional limitations: the International Codes (or I-Codes).[4] There were several free trade developments that led to the founding of ICC: the ratification of the North American Free Trade Agreement, the formation of the European Union, and the EU's efforts to unify standards for building design, construction, and materials across the European Single Market (the Eurocodes).[5] All these developments caused American construction professionals and manufacturers to push for a nationwide building code in the United States, so that they would not need to waste so much time and money complying with different provisions of the regional codes and could instead focus on compliance with other countries' building codes in order to compete internationally for construction projects.[5]
The word "International" in the names of the ICC and all three of its predecessors, as well as the IBC and other ICC products, despite all 18 of the company's board members being residents of the United States, reflects the fact that a number of other countries in the Caribbean and Latin America had already begun to rely on model building codes developed in the United States rather than developing their own from scratch.[citation needed] Thus, ICC from its inception was well aware that it was writing model codes for an international audience. "Calling it 'international' keeps it from being called the 'U.S. Building Code.' explains Bill Tangye, SBCCI Chief Executive Officer. "Some U.S. Model codes are already used outside the United States. Bermuda uses BOCA, and Western Samoa uses ICBO."[6]
1. INTRODUCTION. The Commissioner of Insurance proposes new 5.4606, concerning the temporary appointment of qualified inspectors to conduct windstorm inspections in Jefferson and Chambers counties pursuant to Insurance Code Article 21.49 6A. Temporary appointees will be authorized to perform inspections of residential structures that may be considered insurable property for windstorm and hail insurance, but will be limited to re-roof inspections of residential structures during the construction process. As a result of the destruction caused by Hurricane Rita along the Texas coast, certain counties, and in particular Jefferson and Chambers counties, are facing massive rebuilding and repair of residential and commercial structures. In the Beaumont area alone, approximately 90% of the residential structures are damaged, and the residents are suffering delays in repair of these structures because of the overwhelming demand for windstorm inspections and the lack of qualified inspectors to meet this demand. Inspectors employed by the department are receiving over 100 inspection applications per day. The department has temporarily reassigned its inspectors from other areas on the coast, including Corpus Christi, Angleton, and Bay City, to assist in meeting this demand, and the department's current appointees who perform inspections are responding primarily to the requests for inspections of commercial buildings. As a result, there are long delays for inspections of the vast majority of the residential structures in Jefferson and Chambers counties; these delays continue to adversely impact the ability of residents to rebuild and repair their damaged homes. The department has determined that this lack of availability of willing and qualified inspectors necessitates this proposal to enable the Commissioner to appoint persons with the experience and training that the department has determined is sufficient for qualified inspectors on a temporary basis to respond to residents in the two counties most affected and most in need. The proposed new rule specifies the experience and training of persons eligible to apply for a temporary appointment and outlines the requirements, financial interest prohibitions, and application process for a temporary appointment. The issuance of a temporary appointment to a qualified inspector will only authorize re-roof inspections of residential property in Jefferson and/or Chambers counties; such re-roof inspections must be conducted during the construction process and may not be conducted after completion of the re-roofing process. The proposed expiration date for a temporary appointment is December 31, 2006, unless extended by the department based on demonstrated need in Jefferson or Chambers counties. The temporary appointees will be subject to the provisions of the department's current rule 5.4604 relating to the appointment of engineers as qualified inspectors, including oversight by the department. The temporary appointees will also be subject to the emergency cease and desist provisions of the Insurance Code as provided in proposed subsection (m). This is necessary to ensure that improper inspections are halted as quickly as possible to prevent approval of faulty or inadequate re-roofing of residential structures, which could result in certification of structures that do not meet windstorm building code requirements and also additional harm to the damaged areas in Jefferson and Chambers counties.
Open source software (OSS) development has received considerable attention in the literature (Fitzgerald 2006). Projects developed within the OSS community have enjoyed tremendous success and for-profit organizations are keen to tap into this significant pool of software development talent (Chesbrough 2003; Feller et al. 2008). Examples include Netscape, IBM, MySQL, JBoss and Google (MacCormack, Rusnak et al. 2006; Hauge, Ayala et al. 2010). The ability to draw upon the expertise of developers in the OSS community offers many clear advantages to organizations. However, they must balance the benefits of openness and the ability to make a profit (Shah 2006; West 2003). Specifically, companies must balance intellectual property concerns with the reciprocal and community-based norms that drive OSS development (Stewart and Gosain 2006). For instance, organizations may be concerned about developers leaking source code-based intellectual property into the public domain (Henkel 2008). In addition to intellectual property concerns, allowing people to contribute source code does not ensure that developers will contribute their efforts to the development of the application (MacCormack, Rusnak et al. 2006). The Eclipse project gets most of its platform maintenance from IBM employees (Wagstrom 2009). An additional challenge is that organizational commercial interests are seemingly inimical to the ideology that proponents of the OSS community embrace, causing members of the community to be less enthusiastic about for-profit sponsored projects (Stewart, Ammeter and Maruping 2006). 041b061a72