The following opinion is presented on-line for informational use only and does not replace the official version. (Mich Dept of Attorney General Web Site - www.ag.state.mi.us)


STATE OF MICHIGAN

FRANK J. KELLEY, ATTORNEY GENERAL

Opinion No. 5526

August 1, 1979

STATE CONSTRUCTION CODE ACT:

Compliance with Subdivision Control Act

SUBDIVISION CONTROL ACT:

Conformity with required by State Construction Code Act

TOWNSHIPS:

Refusal to issue building permit for violation of Subdivision Control Act

A building permit may be denied where the proposed construction is to be built on lands divided in violation of the Subdivision Control Act.

The Honorable Charles L. Mueller

State Representative

The Capitol

Lansing, Michigan

You ask my opinion as to whether a township may refuse to issue a building permit on land divided in violation of the Subdivision Control Act, 1967 PA 288; MCLA 560.101 et seq; MSA 26.430(101) et seq.

The State Construction Code Act of 1972, 1972 PA 230; MCLA 125.1501 et seq; MSA 5.2949(1) et seq, Secs. 9 and 11 provide, in pertinent part:

'Sec. 9. (1) Except as otherwise provided in this section, a county is responsible for administration and enforcement of this act and the code throughout the county. A city or village may by ordinance assume responsibility for administration and enforcement of this act in the city or village. A township may by ordinance assume responsibility for administration and enforcement of this act throughout the township except in cities or villages. . . .'

'Sec. 11. (1) The enforcing agency shall examine an application for a building permit. If the application conforms to this act, the code and the requirements of other applicable laws and ordinances, the enforcing agency shall approve the application and issue a building permit to the applicant. . . .' (emphasis added)

OAG, 1975-76, No 4915, p 234, 236 (January 12, 1976) states:

'When a building permit application has been submitted to the appropriate enforcing agency, whether county, city, village, or township, the enforcing agency examines the application; and a building permit is issued if the application conforms with the State Construction Code Act, 1972 PA 230; supra, the State Construction Code and 'other applicable laws and ordinances'. It is noted that in addition to conforming with the requirements of the Act and Code, 1972 PA 230, Sec. 11(1); supra, provides that the requirements of 'other applicable laws and ordinances' must also be satisfied before a building permit is issued.

'Although very broadly defined in 1972 PA 30, Sec. 2(1)(p); supra, 'other laws and ordinances' is limited in 1972 PA 230, Sec. 11(1); supra, by use and interjection of the adjective 'applicable'. Clearly then, it is intended by the legislature that the requirements of 'other laws and ordinances' must be met prior to approval of a building permit application only if they are 'applicable'. The question then becomes: What, if any, are the other 'applicable' laws and ordinances? The word 'applicable' has been defined:

'. . . as meaning appropriate, fit, pertinent or suitable; capable of being applied. It is a term of description not limitation. The word is said to be capable of two meanings, either 'relevant', as sometimes defined, or, as more commonly understood, 'to bring into actual contact with', the meaning in a particular case depending on the context.' [6 CJS, Applicable, p 99].

'Whether other laws or ordinances are 'applicable' would also depend upon the purposes, intents and objectives of the other laws or ordinances vis-a-vis the purposes, intents and objectives relative to building permit approval; that is a demonstrable nexus in the above context between building permit requirements and permit requirement of other laws or ordinances.'

Under authority granted it by Sections 4 and 6 of the State Construction Code Act of 1972, supra, the State Construction Code Commission has promulgated the State Construction Code. 1974 AACS pp 7465 et seq; 1976 AACS p 8857 et seq, R 408.30101 et seq.

The purpose of the State Construction Code Act of 1972, supra, and the State Construction Code, supra, are as expressed in Rule 100.4 (See Basic Building Code, 1975 Edition, Building Officials and Code Administrators International, Chicago, Ill.):

'. . . to secure its expressed intent, which is to insure public safety, health and welfare insofar as they are affected by building construction, through structural strength, adequate egress facilities, sanitary equipment, light and ventilation and fire safety; and, in general, to secure safety to life and property from all hazards incident to the design, erection, repair, removal, demolition or use and occupancy of buildings, structures or premises.'

The Subdivision Control Act, supra, is likewise designed to protect the public health, safety and welfare through appropriate review of plans for the development of land. That review and conditions required for approval are designed to, among other purposes, secure adequate ingress and egress to lands subdivided, protect life and properties from the dangers incident to construction in floodplains, assure that lands to be developed are suitable for building purposes, i.e., that the lands are suitable for placement of septic systems or are adequately served by central sewer and water systems.

I therefore conclude that building permits may be denied where the proposed construction is to be built on lands divided in violation of the Subdivision Control Act, supra.

Frank J. Kelley

Attorney General