Updated : 04/22/2024
Overview
Helpful resources for Chinook, Montana include the following.
Updated : 04/22/2024
Helpful resources for Chinook, Montana include the following.
Chinook adopted a code that is yet to be identified .Please contact PLRB if you would like us to research this for you.
2021 IRC with Montana amendments(Chinook, MT DISPOSITION OF ORDINANCES TABLE)
...IV, § 4 (12) (1) (A) (2) and (3), zoning (17.28) 482 Designates county justice of the peace to act as city judge (Not codified) 483 Amends Ord. 480, salaries and wages of officers and employees (Repealed by 514) 484 Changes to the position of city judge from an elected position to an appointed position (Special) 485 Amends Ord. 475 § 4 paragraph(F), removal of garbage cans and containers (8.12) 486 Regulates and restricts use of water, affirming Resolution 679 (Special) 487 Amends Ord. 414 § 6 paragraph(B), penalty for permitting dog to run at large (Repealed by 526) 488 Amends Ord. 483, salaries and wages of officers and employees (Repealed by 514) 489 Amends Ord. 360, industrial user charges (13.28) 490 Adopts model technical codes and administrative regulations; repeals Ords. 472 and 479 (Repealed by 499) 491 Adds § 13.04.080, outside watering restrictions (13.04) (Repealed by 524) 492 Amends Ord. 491, outside watering restrictions (13.04) (Repealed by 524) 493 Amends Ord 488, salaries and wages of officers and employees (Repealed by 514) 494 Airport influence area (17.40) 495 Airport zones and height restrictions (17.44) 496 Amends Ord. 493, salaries and wages of officers and employees (Repealed by 514) 497 Fire department, regulations; repeals Ord. 328 (Repealed by 525) 498 Amends Ord. §1 of 496, officers' salaries (Repealed by 514) 499 Adopts 2003 International Building Code, modifications to International Building Code, 2003 International Residential Code, and 2003 International Energy Conservation Code; repeals Ord. 490 (Repealed by 506) 500 Amends §1 of Ord. 498, officers' salaries (Repealed by 514) 501 Amends Ord. 447, bond issuance (Special) 502 Amends Ord. 410, water regulations (13.04) 503 Amends §1 of Ord. 500, officers' salaries (Repealed by 514) 504 Amends Ord. 434 [435], floodplain and floodway management (15.28) 505 Amends §1 of Ord. 503, officers' salaries (Repealed by 514) 506 Adopts 2006 International Building Code, modifications to International Building Code, and 2006 International Residential Code; repeals Ord. 499 (15.02) (Repealed by 519) 507 Amends Ord. §1 of 505, officers' salaries (Repealed by 514) 508 Amends §1 of Ord. 265, street excavation, repeals Ord. 351 (11.08) 509 Amends §1 of Ord. 456, parking commercial vehicles in residential districts (10.30) 510 Amends Ord. 452, authorizes police to make arrests within city limits, within five miles thereof, and along the line of the city water supply (2.14) 511 Amends Ord. §1 of 507, officers' salaries (Repealed by 514) 512 Landscaping and maintenance of boulevards, repeals Ord. 388 (11.12) 513 Amends Ord. §1 of 511, officers' salaries (Repealed by 514) 514 Repeals and replaces Chapter 2.10, officers' salaries (2.10) 515 Interim zoning ordinance imposing restrictions upon location, opening, operation and licensing of medical marijuana establishments (Not codified) 516 Adopts 2010 International Energy Conservation Code, repeals Ord. 499 (15.02) (Repealed by 519) 517 Adds § 17.04.040, uses of land shall not be in violation of federal, state or local law (17.04) 518 Adds § 8.04.090, regulations regarding railroad freight cars, box cars, cargo containers and other large metal containers (8.04) 519 Repeals Ords. 472, 473, 506, 516 (15.02) 520 Building permit fees for non-commercial property (Not codified) 521 Community decay and public nuisances (8.06) (Repealed by 531) 522 Repeals §6 of Ord. 323....
Drip Edge: Undetermined
Chinook adopted a code that is yet to be identified .Please contact PLRB if you would like us to research this for you.
2018 IBC with Montana amendments(Chinook, MT Municipal Code)
...Adoption not found...
Recent Updates
Does Kaysville, Utah, Residential Building Code Require Ice Barrier Underlayment When Replacing a Roof?
June 26, 2024 By Dan Hartweg QUESTION: For a roofing project in Kaysville, Utah, does the residential building code require ice barrier underlayment? RESPONSE: Yes. The 2021 Utah State Residential Code (USRC) does not require ice barrier underlayment unless there is a history of ice forming along the eaves causing a backup of water, which is left to local jurisdictions to determine and adopt the requirement. 2021 USRC § R905.1.2. Utah did not complete Table R301.2, “Ice Barrier Underlayment Required” column, leaving it to local jurisdictions to complete the table. 2021 USRC Table R301.2. While the Kaysville City Code does not contain any amendments to Table 301.2, according to the Kaysville City Community Development website, ice barrier underlayment is required. FACTS: Roof repairs at a private residence located in Unincorporated, West Jordan, Utah. DISCUSSION: Utah adopted the 2021 International Residential Code (IRC), including Appendices AE and AQ, with amendments, as the uniform statewide residential code known as the 2021 Utah State Residential Code (USRC) and is part of the mandatory statewide building code, the State Construction Code (SCC). Utah Code § 15A-2-101. (Adoption of SCC); Utah Code §§ 15A-2-103(b), (d), and (m) (adoption); Utah Code §§ 15A-3-101 through 206 (IRC amendments); Utah Code §§ 15A-4-201 through 207 (IRC local amendments); 2021 USRC (ICC page). The State and its political subdivisions are required to follow the SCC. Utah Code § 15A-1-204(1)(a). The Division administers the SCC, but it is not within the Division's responsibility to enforce it, the responsibility for inspections and enforcement under the SCC fall on the compliance agency. Utah Code § 15A-1-205 (Division duties); Utah Code § 15A-1-207(1) (compliance agency with jurisdiction over project shall inspect and enforce SCC). A compliance agency is defined as an agency of the State or any of its political subdivisions which issues permits for construction regulated under the SCC. Utah Code § 15A-1-202(6). The compliance agency must follow the Division’s established standardized permit system, may charge a fee but must impose a 1% surcharge to help fund Division education efforts, and must promptly review plans and inspect properties. Utah Code § 15A-1-209 (building permit requirements and surcharge); Utah Code § 10-6-160 (municipality may charge fee and must review plans and inspect properties promptly); U.A.C. R156-15A-220 (standardized permits). A search of the subject property on the PLRB address search page indicates that it is located within the City of Kaysville, Utah. 2021 USRC Reroofing Section R908 of the 2021 USRC on Reroofing requires that recovering or replacing an existing roof must comply with the materials and methods outlined for new roofs: 2021 USRC § R908.1. Therefore, the provisions concerning ice barrier underlayment and drip edges in Chapter 9 must be considered. ICE BARRIER UNDERLAYMENT Ice barrier underlayment is required under Section R905.1.2 where there is a history of ice forming along eaves causing a backup of water as designated in local amendments in Table R301.2: 2021 USRC § R905.1.2. Utah did not complete Table R301.2 as follows, in relevant part: 2021 USRC Table R301.2. Because no amendment to IRC Table R301.2(1) was made by the legislature, the need for ice barrier underlayment is left to local jurisdictions. Utah Code §§ 15A-3-101 through 206; 2021 USRC Table R301.2. Kaysville City adopted the current version of the International Residential Code adopted by the State of Utah. Kaysville City Code § 18-2-2. The City did not adopt any amendments to Table 301.2. Id., see also, Kaysville City Code Title 18, Chapter 3. However, according to the City’s website, ice barrier underlayment is required. Kaysville City, Community Development, Roofing Requirements. DISCUSSION: Utah adopted the 2021 International Residential Code (IRC), as amended, as the 2021 Utah State Residential Code (USRC) and part of the 2021 Utah State Construction Code, a uniform statewide code. The state did not complete Table R301.2, leaving the decision to require ice barrier underlayment up to local jurisdictions where there has been a history of ice forming along eaves causing a backup of water. While the Kaysville City Code does not contain an amendment to Table R301.2, according to the Kaysville City Community Development website, ice barrier underlayment is required.
AZ – STATUTORY BULLETIN – New Arizona Law Modifies Certain Minimum Limits that Apply to Transportation Network Services (e.g., Uber) and Services Involving Taxis, Livery Vehicles, and Limousines
Recently, Arizona's Governor signed into law House Bill 2729, which (1) addresses transportation network companies (TNCs) (e.g., Uber) and their drivers and (2) modifies the minimum required limits for commercial motor vehicle liability insurance and commercial uninsured motorist coverage. See Ariz. Stat. § 28-4038(B). The new law also (1) addresses taxi companies, livery vehicle companies, and limousine companies and the drivers of such vehicles and (2) modifies the minimum required limits for commercial uninsured motorist coverage. See Ariz. Stat. § 28-4039(A)(2). The new law takes effect on September 14, 2024.
Is there a Duty to Defend the Insureds Against the Plaintiff's Complaint that Alleges Damages Due to the Movement of Water, Debris, and Unstable Soils onto the Plaintiff's Property?
The Plaintiff's Complaint alleges that the Defendants "built a house on the uphill property from Plaintiff" and that, during the policy period of the Defendants' Homeowners Policy, "[the] Plaintiff became aware that water, debris, mud, unstable soils and other materials slipped, slid and/or moved from Defendants' property onto Plaintiff's property." The question is whether the insurer is required to defend the homeowners against this Complaint, which asserts negligence and trespass claims against the homeowners.
Thompson v. Allstate Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. (2024)
(United States District Court for the District of Maryland, applying MD law) Note that this case was decided by a U.S. District Court, a trial court in the federal court system. Its opinion is not binding precedent, but it may be cited as persuasive authority.
Copyright © Property & Liability Resource Bureau 2024