Court Opinion

ID: 9564251
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 18:56:45.887047+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:18:19.024431
License: Public Domain

BISTLINE Justice,
concurring and dissenting.
The first question here is whether the State of Idaho is bound to comply with a city building code when it builds a state building within the city limits, and I think that the Court’s opinion provides the correct answer — no it need not. E. g., Board of Regents v. City of Tempe, 88 Ariz. 299, 356 P.2d 399 (1960) (where the city was enjoined from applying its building codes and regulations to the construction of a state structure). The further question arises, however, whether a state building that does not comply with the city building code is necessarily safe for public use just because it is a state building. Obviously this is not true, and it is for the jury to determine whether the state building was negligently designed and built. The final and determinative question thus becomes whether the Boise ordinance was relevant to the issue of the alleged negligence of the State.
Here, as the majority notes, the Permanent Building Fund Council had the option under I.C. § 67-2304 of adopting rules and regulations covering the “construction, alteration, equipping and furnishing and repair” of state buildings. However, it appears from the appeal record presented that no such rules and regulations were ever adopted, from which it follows that at the time the State built Bronco Stadium the State had promulgated no specific code of safety regulations for state buildings,1 and *163in particular no regulation which required the installation of handrails on extremely long and precipitous stairways.
The City of Boise, on the other hand, had adopted a building code that, among other things, required the installation of handrails in stairways. This determination that handrails should be required was not a mere off-chance determination by the Boise City Council. Rather, Boise had adopted the provisions of the 1967 edition of the Uniform Building Code (Code),2 which contained the requirement for handrails in § 3305(i). The Code stated that it was first published by the Pacific Coast Building Officials Conference in 1927, and that it has been revised every three years thru 1967. Testimony at trial indicated that a major percentage of buildings in the United States are covered by the Code, and that the basic purpose for setting up these standards was “maintaining life safety regulations for all public buildings.” From this it readily follows that the Boise City ordinance, although it could not establish negligence per se, was admissible as evidence on the issue of negligence. See, e. g., Frazier v. Continental Oil Co., 568 F.2d 378 (5th Cir. 1978); St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co. v. Burlison, 262 So.2d 280 (Fla.App.1972); Jorgensen v. Horton, 206 N.W.2d 100 (Iowa 1973); Nordstrom v. White Metal Rolling & Stamping Corp., 75 Wash.2d 629, 453 P.2d 619 (1969); Vogel v. Alaska Steamship Co., 69 Wash.2d 497, 419 P.2d 141 (1966).
Because it cannot be said that the rejection of the Boise building code falls into the category of harmless error, I am unable to join the Court in affirming.

. The Idaho Building Code Advisory Act, I.C. §§ 39-4101 to 4129, was thereafter adopted, in 1975, to provide for uniform building codes throughout Idaho.

. Idaho adopted the Uniform Building Code on a statewide basis in 1975 in I.C. § 39-4109.