How can a building be safe at one point of the day, but suddenly unsafe during another? That sounds like an idiotic code designed to punish exactly this.
In real terms, no, the risks are very low. Far lower than dying exposed in the gutter outside.
In code terms, the laws are based in safety and to keep people from slumlording.
Semi-public sleeping areas need to provide accessible beds, adequate fire alarms/suppression, and sufficient bathroom/sanitation access. Think of it like the requirements to run an actual shelter.
Ideally, this would be a temporary situation, and they’d either relocate the people to somewhere with facilities or, if they intend to run a shelter, properly convert the church.
The actual code this church violated has to do with the plot of land, not the building itself. It has nothing to do with safety, and everything to do with the people controlling how others use land they didn’t own.
How can a building be safe at one point of the day, but suddenly unsafe during another? That sounds like an idiotic code designed to punish exactly this.
In real terms, no, the risks are very low. Far lower than dying exposed in the gutter outside.
In code terms, the laws are based in safety and to keep people from slumlording.
Semi-public sleeping areas need to provide accessible beds, adequate fire alarms/suppression, and sufficient bathroom/sanitation access. Think of it like the requirements to run an actual shelter.
Ideally, this would be a temporary situation, and they’d either relocate the people to somewhere with facilities or, if they intend to run a shelter, properly convert the church.
The actual code this church violated has to do with the plot of land, not the building itself. It has nothing to do with safety, and everything to do with the people controlling how others use land they didn’t own.