I have written extensively about ICC/THIA 1215 -Design, Construction and Regulation of Small Residential Units and Tiny Houses for Permanent Occupancy standard and the hijack of the standard with the SRU detour.
The Small Residential Unit ( SRU) is an arbitrary, unconstitutional term that ICC has cooked up to rebrand the tiny house industry for the regulatory capture of the tiny house industry for their control.
The SRU is not needed for the structural integrity, fire safety, or any reason at all for tiny houses. It is a whim of ICC.
Definition
SMALL RESIDENTIAL UNIT (SRU). A dwelling that is 1200 square feet (111 m2) or less excluding lofts and is constructed as a permanent residential structure with or without a permanent chassis.
Note: There has been discussion about changing the size down to 600 square feet but that has not been reflected in meeting notes that I have seen. That changes nothing.
Below is a statement that is in the foreward of the standard that hides the opportunity for manufacturers that could utilize this opportunity RIGHT NOW for legal placement and mortgages for tiny houses. I am not saying it is simple, but the opportunity has been right under our nose all this time.
Below are also important resources to understand HUD preemption, and the RV exemption. It is especially important to understand that HUD does not regulate the use and occupancy of RVs, that is beyond the scope of HUD, and under the local and state purview.
The Statement
“The information contained in this foreword is not part of this American National Standard (ANS) and has not been processed in accordance with ANSI’s requirements for an ANS. As such, this foreword may contain material that has not been subjected to public review or a consensus process. In addition, it does not contain requirements necessary for conformance to this standard.”
“This Standard will not address tiny houses used for temporary or seasonal occupancy, tiny houses installed on temporary foundations, or tiny house community development or microgrids.”
“In the U.S., off-site constructed units with a permanent chassis and over 320 sq ft may be subject to requirements under the HUD code. If the Authority Having Jurisdiction adopts this standard as part of its building code, the tiny house may qualify for an exemption.”
Issues With The Statement
Who would read the foreward of the standard? No one right. What is so disturbing is that it is inaccurate, misleading, states half truths, and ICC has no authority to put out bulletins regarding HUD rulings regarding tiny houses that HUD has not ruled on.
Breaking Down The False And Misleading Statements
“In the U.S., off-site constructed units with a permanent chassis and over 320 sq ft may be subject to requirements under the HUD code. If the Authority Having Jurisdiction adopts this standard as part of its building code, the tiny house may qualify for an exemption.”
1) Misleading statement. This is partially taken from the § 3282.12 – Excluded structures—modular homes.
2) False– they ARE subject to, NOT may be subject to
3) Misleading -”If the Authority Having Jurisdiction adopts this standard as part of its building code, the tiny house may qualify for an exemption. ”
How it is misleading is that it is written in a manner that at first glance, you think it means that the standard has to be adopted first to qualify for a tiny house to qualify for an exemption.
Not true. False- the modular exclusion does NOT call it an exemption, it is referred to as an exclusion, and the steps are available right NOW for a manufacturer to be excluded from HUD regulation with a voluntary certification process and following exact steps so the unit can be built to building codes that include all the state and local requirements, all steps must be followed.
The standard is not needed for the exclusion. ICC is adding a step for their own benefit that is NOT even required.
Read The Full Article. It Includes A Short Video Explainer
Link
Short Summary
The modular exclusion from § 3282.12 – Excluded structures allows builders to bypass HUD preemption and build to state and local requirements. It eliminates the purported need for the SRU term, as larger tiny houses can already be built legally under this modular framework.
The industry stands at a crossroads: Are you willing to navigate the complex but available federal exclusion path today, or will you wait for the ICC to define—and control—your Small Residential Unit future?
This standard is being developed under ‘the guise of standardization’ and progress for the tiny house industry but instead it is throwing the tiny house industry in chaos and to crush small artisan builders and they are blocking the paths for compliance that is already in place, and they trying to find a work around federal requirements, and disregarding motor vehicle and HUD preemption, the exact steps needed for compliance.
Article Link
Thank you,
Janet Thome President
Tiny House Alliance USA
janet@tinyhouseallianceusa.org
509 345 2013