2 actually.
1 My town requires a permit to put paneling on your walls. Is this
normal? NOt that I am putting paneling up, but it seems odd to require
it... why would it be required aside from the money grab.
2 My town will not allow contractors to draw and design mods even if not
structural unless they have an architecture /engineer license. But the
home owner is allowed to draw / design.. Is this normal too?
I would think most contractors would be better than a homeowner.
--
Jeff
On 3/28/2014 3:32 PM, G. Ross wrote:
> I built a small greenhouse from scratch using corrugated plastic sheets
> over a frame--white for the roof and translucent for the sides. No
> contractor, no permit.
> The next year our taxes increased. We went down and contested it. They
> had pictures of the house from every side and a picture of the
> greenhouse. We have a high solid fence around the back yard but someone
> had gotten a picture without our knowing it.
>
> They did back off on the taxes though.
Around here they use Sat photos to see any improvements.
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On 3/28/2014 4:32 PM, G. Ross wrote:
> woodchucker wrote:
>> 2 actually.
>> 1 My town requires a permit to put paneling on your walls. Is this
>> normal? NOt that I am putting paneling up, but it seems odd to require
>> it... why would it be required aside from the money grab.
>>
>> 2 My town will not allow contractors to draw and design mods even if not
>> structural unless they have an architecture /engineer license. But the
>> home owner is allowed to draw / design.. Is this normal too?
>>
>> I would think most contractors would be better than a homeowner.
>>
> I built a small greenhouse from scratch using corrugated plastic sheets
> over a frame--white for the roof and translucent for the sides. No
> contractor, no permit.
> The next year our taxes increased. We went down and contested it. They
> had pictures of the house from every side and a picture of the
> greenhouse. We have a high solid fence around the back yard but someone
> had gotten a picture without our knowing it.
>
> They did back off on the taxes though.
>
Yea, when I put in a shed, the town told me that if I kept it under a
certain size I would not pay taxes and not require a permit.
Well I didn't require a permit, but they hit me with taxes anyway.
The money hungry bastards.
--
Jeff
On 3/28/2014 8:58 PM, Markem wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 20:06:38 -0400, woodchucker <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> I certainly did allow it. I think goverment has gone too far in most all
>> cases, or not enough in others (like politicians should have the same
>> rules that us PEON's have).
>
> Well how about a rule after you have served your time in congress, you
> get a free vacation in a minimum security facility.
>
> Mark
>
Oops that should have been " I certainly didn't allow it.."
--
Jeff
On Sunday, March 30, 2014 2:07:16 PM UTC-5, woodchucker wrote:
> So that's a money grab.. they are not even ensuring it's built correct.=
=20
>=20
> So what are you getting for your money?
As a contractor I get absolutely nothing. In most of the small incorporati=
ons they they nothing as well. In those small towns the city inspections d=
epartment is often run by the city fire chief, the second in command in the=
police department or a deputy mayor. You can guess what they know about b=
uilding trades.=20
You apply for inspections on one, possibly two days a week between certain =
hours. If the concerned folks of the inspection department are busy, you wa=
it until the following week. IT IS ONLY A MONEY GRAB. PERIOD.
We have some good inspectors here in San Antonio, pretty well trained. All=
contractors know about the painful experience of getting a permit for the =
small entities so we price accordingly.
Robert
We have a mixed bag of requirements on that here in San Antonio. We are la=
rge city that has expanded to engulf many smaller cities and incorporations=
. All of them have their own rules and regulations.
In San Antonio itself, you can perform just about any kind of >>repairs or =
maintenance<< you want yourself as long as you conform to the Southern Buil=
ding Codes. You can paint, fix your fence, replace a window, fix your roof=
, plant grass, replace a faucet, and install paneling if you want with no p=
ermits.
But you cannot change the profile of the domicile in any way. So no room ad=
ditions, no patio covers, no fireplaces, no dormers, etc. Also, no mechani=
cal work of any kind. While you can replace an electrical plug or switch (=
considered maintenance)or replace a light fixture, you can't do much else w=
ithout a permit. No circuits, wiring of any type or replacement or upgrade=
of service without permits and inspections. Same guidelines for plumbing =
and air conditioning.
The catch? If a city building inspector or code compliance officer drives b=
y and you are doing more than allowed or are not doing it to Southern Build=
ing Code (and San Antonio local codes)they can make you stop on the spot. =
A ticket follows that depending on the violation can generate up to a $5000=
fine. Also, no work can commence until a full, written scope of work submi=
tted by a city licensed contractor, and if needed, drawings. Those have to =
be approved by the city. To add to the cost, you have 10 days to comply and=
may not do anything to the stopped work without risking further fines. Als=
o, since it is now considered an "expedited" project, approval fees double,=
inspection fees double, and all fines must be paid up front before work ca=
n commence.
That's the penalties for a homeowner. As a contractor, it is much nastier =
and they can prevent you from working at all if you are a repeat offender.
On the other hand, some of our little encapsulated burgs require permits fo=
r anything. I mean anything. They do NO inspections during or at the end =
of the job unless it is a huge job. If it is a roof, siding replacement, w=
indows, etc., you apply for a permit at which time you "promise" to install=
the item specified to the manufacturer's specifications and in compliance =
with all applicable codes. While they do no follow up, they will fine you a=
s much as they can if they catch you doing anything without a permit.
Personally, I am of a mixed mind on this subject. Overwhelmed homeowners t=
hat want to play contractor after watching a steady diet of tattooed, pierc=
ed 20 somethings and bossy women that can run rough shod over experienced c=
ontractors on TV make up about 1/3 of my clients. Unless these folks were b=
old/foolish enough to play contractor they wouldn't be nearly as grateful t=
o me for taking charge when they have enough of it all. I get a lot of refe=
rrals simply from folks that start a project, can't finish it, and someone =
gives them my name. Works for me.
The other aspect of it is that once folks get screwed by a fly by night unq=
ualified contractor they are usually much easier to work with and will pay =
more to get more. I hate to see a homeowner that wants to try something ne=
w for themselves or is trying to be more self reliant get screwed. Likewis=
e if they just don't have the money to hire a professional to do some maint=
enance. But I can't help but laugh when one of these TV educated contractor=
s gets a REAL education in contracting and code compliance in the real worl=
d.
Robert
On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 14:12:54 -0400, woodchucker <[email protected]>
wrote:
>2 actually.
>1 My town requires a permit to put paneling on your walls. Is this
>normal? NOt that I am putting paneling up, but it seems odd to require
>it... why would it be required aside from the money grab.
Do they need another reason?
>2 My town will not allow contractors to draw and design mods even if not
>structural unless they have an architecture /engineer license. But the
>home owner is allowed to draw / design.. Is this normal too?
Normal? It's certainly not unique. Where I lived in NY, a homeowner
could do even structural drawings for additions up to $10K value.
>I would think most contractors would be better than a homeowner.
Perhaps but homeowners tend to over-design, too.
On 3/28/2014 3:07 PM, Swingman wrote:
> On 3/28/2014 1:12 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>
>> 2 actually.
>> 1 My town requires a permit to put paneling on your walls. Is this
>> normal? NOt that I am putting paneling up, but it seems odd to require
>> it... why would it be required aside from the money grab.
>
> See below.
>
>> 2 My town will not allow contractors to draw and design mods even if not
>> structural unless they have an architecture /engineer license. But the
>> home owner is allowed to draw / design.. Is this normal too?
>
> Answer to both is the same, YES. It is both normal, and ubiquitous, for
> municipalities to require permits for most anything done to a residence.
>
> That is a GOOD thing!
>
> It is also common for a homeowner to be allowed do his own work on his
> home, even electrical, plumbing and other "trade work", providing the
> owner permits the job in his name and it is inspected ... and that also
> entails the homeowner do, or have done, any necessary plans and drawings.
>
> That is a GOOD thing!
>
> However, a fact most don't know/forget, and a mistake I see made by
> homeowners, especially those who try to fly under the permit/inspection
> radar, all the time:
>
> FACT: _You can NOT expect/get an _accurate_ bid from any contractor
> without specific plans/drawings depicting/spec'ing the job, and
> therefore what you are expecting of the contractor_ .
>
> Many contractors are more than happy to bid on an ill planed/planless,
> unpermitted jobs. It makes for much more "ca ching" when things are not
> specified, and unexpected changes occur, which they always do; and that
> much easier to cheat the homeowner on something that obviously didn't
> exist in the first place.
>
> Besides an approved plan being obviously necessary for the homeowner
> sake, now and at resale time, it is also easier to inspect for the city
> inspection department, which insures you get at least a "built to
> minimum standards" job.
>
>> I would think most contractors would be better than a homeowner.
>
> Being in the business, and seeing the work done by contractors on
> unpermitted jobs I see, fix and repair, I would not agree with that at all.
>
> I tell homeowners all the time, a permit and inspection is in _both_ of
> our best interests:
>
> 1. As mentioned above, it insures the homeowner gets at least a "built
> to minimum standards" job for their money.
>
> 2. And it also gives me, the contractor, a hammer over subcontractors
> without risk of a job being sabotaged in some manner through hard
> feeling about quality of work performed and/or not doing the job
> properly (a happening not uncommon in the business) ... IOW, if a trade
> sub fails an inspection, there is no one to blame but himself.
>
> Long and short of it for homeowners ... unless the Contractor is me, or
> your mother, and even then - get the farkin' job on your home permitted
> and inspected!
>
I'm not arguing permits. I am not against the permits.
What I don't understand is why paneling requires a permit? That seems
odd, as it is not structural.
And why a contractor could not provide the design/layout for a
non-structural change for the permit.
--
Jeff
On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 14:07:08 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 3/28/2014 1:12 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>
>> 2 actually.
>> 1 My town requires a permit to put paneling on your walls. Is this
>> normal? NOt that I am putting paneling up, but it seems odd to require
>> it... why would it be required aside from the money grab.
>
>See below.
>
>> 2 My town will not allow contractors to draw and design mods even if not
>> structural unless they have an architecture /engineer license. But the
>> home owner is allowed to draw / design.. Is this normal too?
>
>Answer to both is the same, YES. It is both normal, and ubiquitous, for
>municipalities to require permits for most anything done to a residence.
>
>That is a GOOD thing!
>
>It is also common for a homeowner to be allowed do his own work on his
>home, even electrical, plumbing and other "trade work", providing the
>owner permits the job in his name and it is inspected ... and that also
>entails the homeowner do, or have done, any necessary plans and drawings.
>
>That is a GOOD thing!
>
>However, a fact most don't know/forget, and a mistake I see made by
>homeowners, especially those who try to fly under the permit/inspection
>radar, all the time:
>
>FACT: _You can NOT expect/get an _accurate_ bid from any contractor
>without specific plans/drawings depicting/spec'ing the job, and
>therefore what you are expecting of the contractor_ .
>
>Many contractors are more than happy to bid on an ill planed/planless,
>unpermitted jobs. It makes for much more "ca ching" when things are not
>specified, and unexpected changes occur, which they always do; and that
>much easier to cheat the homeowner on something that obviously didn't
>exist in the first place.
>
>Besides an approved plan being obviously necessary for the homeowner
>sake, now and at resale time, it is also easier to inspect for the city
>inspection department, which insures you get at least a "built to
>minimum standards" job.
>
>> I would think most contractors would be better than a homeowner.
>
>Being in the business, and seeing the work done by contractors on
>unpermitted jobs I see, fix and repair, I would not agree with that at all.
>
>I tell homeowners all the time, a permit and inspection is in _both_ of
>our best interests:
>
>1. As mentioned above, it insures the homeowner gets at least a "built
>to minimum standards" job for their money.
>
>2. And it also gives me, the contractor, a hammer over subcontractors
>without risk of a job being sabotaged in some manner through hard
>feeling about quality of work performed and/or not doing the job
>properly (a happening not uncommon in the business) ... IOW, if a trade
>sub fails an inspection, there is no one to blame but himself.
>
>Long and short of it for homeowners ... unless the Contractor is me, or
>your mother, and even then - get the farkin' job on your home permitted
>and inspected!
Requiring a permit for non-structural "renovations" is pretty much a
cash grab. I'm talking "decorating".
Electrical and plumbing is a different story.
The reason an "unqualified" contractor may not be allowed to submit
drawings is he is charging for the service, and the service being
provided is covered by a "mandatory qualification" trade.
A homeowner can submit his own drawings for his own home due to
"property rights" legislation - the same thing that allows a homeowner
to do his own work on his own home. Anything safety related -
particularly to do with the safety of others, (generally) requires an
inspection. Anything that carries a fire risk (generally) requires an
inspection.
I can sort of see the rationalle behind requiring a permit for
installing panelling - if nailing it up an idiot can do a lot of
damage to wiring and plumbing by using the wrong nails - and covering
junction boxes etc would be very easy - good way to cover up the
unpermitted and unispected wiring hack-job.
That said, a lot of so-called contractors are every bit as bad -
particularly in areas where mandatory qualification is not in place,
and "contractors" do not need to be licenced or insured, and where no
job specification is in place (customer just says "fix the wiring and
plumbing and make it look pretty - for the lowest price possible"
On 3/28/2014 1:12 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> 2 actually.
> 1 My town requires a permit to put paneling on your walls. Is this
> normal? NOt that I am putting paneling up, but it seems odd to require
> it... why would it be required aside from the money grab.
See below.
> 2 My town will not allow contractors to draw and design mods even if not
> structural unless they have an architecture /engineer license. But the
> home owner is allowed to draw / design.. Is this normal too?
Answer to both is the same, YES. It is both normal, and ubiquitous, for
municipalities to require permits for most anything done to a residence.
That is a GOOD thing!
It is also common for a homeowner to be allowed do his own work on his
home, even electrical, plumbing and other "trade work", providing the
owner permits the job in his name and it is inspected ... and that also
entails the homeowner do, or have done, any necessary plans and drawings.
That is a GOOD thing!
However, a fact most don't know/forget, and a mistake I see made by
homeowners, especially those who try to fly under the permit/inspection
radar, all the time:
FACT: _You can NOT expect/get an _accurate_ bid from any contractor
without specific plans/drawings depicting/spec'ing the job, and
therefore what you are expecting of the contractor_ .
Many contractors are more than happy to bid on an ill planed/planless,
unpermitted jobs. It makes for much more "ca ching" when things are not
specified, and unexpected changes occur, which they always do; and that
much easier to cheat the homeowner on something that obviously didn't
exist in the first place.
Besides an approved plan being obviously necessary for the homeowner
sake, now and at resale time, it is also easier to inspect for the city
inspection department, which insures you get at least a "built to
minimum standards" job.
> I would think most contractors would be better than a homeowner.
Being in the business, and seeing the work done by contractors on
unpermitted jobs I see, fix and repair, I would not agree with that at all.
I tell homeowners all the time, a permit and inspection is in _both_ of
our best interests:
1. As mentioned above, it insures the homeowner gets at least a "built
to minimum standards" job for their money.
2. And it also gives me, the contractor, a hammer over subcontractors
without risk of a job being sabotaged in some manner through hard
feeling about quality of work performed and/or not doing the job
properly (a happening not uncommon in the business) ... IOW, if a trade
sub fails an inspection, there is no one to blame but himself.
Long and short of it for homeowners ... unless the Contractor is me, or
your mother, and even then - get the farkin' job on your home permitted
and inspected!
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On 3/28/2014 1:32 PM, Bill wrote:
> Maybe it's an invitation to raise your property taxes (aside
> from just the money for the permit)?
That is quite common also. In Texas the appraisal districts have access
to all municipal and county building permits and records, and it is rare
the process does not insure a rise in property values.
Then again, it is YOU who allow the bastards to get away with it in the
first place ... they count on your apathy, and rightfully so.
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On 3/28/2014 5:15 PM, -MIKE- wrote:
> On 3/28/14, 3:27 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>> What I don't understand is why paneling requires a permit? That seems
>> odd, as it is not structural.
>>
>
> The only thing I can think of is fireproofing. Wood paneling doesn't
> retard the spread of fire like sheetrock does. It is possible they
> would want it treated with a fire retardant spray, or even put up *over*
> sheetrock to keep the fire rating of the wall hee same.
>
>
Yea they are kind of wierd here, they would not let me surface the walls
in my shop with plywood, due to fire risk. But I had to use ply as a
firestop every 10 feet between the studs and the concrete, and caulk it.
So why is it good as a firestop, but not for a wall treatment?
Bizarre rules. What do people with tongue and groove pine or
wainescotting do ??? I have been to estate sales around here that are
tongue and groove.
--
Jeff
On 3/28/2014 5:01 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> Yea, when I put in a shed, the town told me that if I kept it under a
> certain size I would not pay taxes and not require a permit.
>
> Well I didn't require a permit, but they hit me with taxes anyway.
> The money hungry bastards.
>
I needrd a permit over 100 sq ft, but no tax unless I anchor it and make
it a permanent structure. I had to give a sketch of the location as it
could not be within 5' of the property line.
On 3/28/2014 2:12 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> 2 actually.
> 1 My town requires a permit to put paneling on your walls. Is this
> normal? NOt that I am putting paneling up, but it seems odd to require
> it... why would it be required aside from the money grab.
>
> 2 My town will not allow contractors to draw and design mods even if not
> structural unless they have an architecture /engineer license. But the
> home owner is allowed to draw / design.. Is this normal too?
>
> I would think most contractors would be better than a homeowner.
>
I've never gotten a permit for interior work in my own house. OTOH, I
saw a homeowner wire all the receptacles he added using lamp cord. He
was going to put up paneling.
When doing commercial work, we did get permits for anything but small jobs.
On 3/28/2014 3:27 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> I'm not arguing permits. I am not against the permits.
> What I don't understand is why paneling requires a permit? That seems
> odd, as it is not structural.
> And why a contractor could not provide the design/layout for a
> non-structural change for the permit.
Both can likely be answered by the same concept in vogue these days
among many urban jurisdictions.
In the guise of "safety", many jurisdictions now have ordinances in
place that require certain things be done, like installation of fire
sprinkler systems, if the total cost, or total square footage, involved
in a renovation exceeds a certain percentage of the square footage of a
home, or a certain percentage of the value of the home.
In some cases these calculations, part of the required plan
review/approval for permit process, are even figured on a room by room
basis.
An example - in some jurisdictions hereabouts we can easily, and
inadvertently, run afoul of these plan based requirements when simply
removing a 2sf section of drywall in a ceiling to determine load bearing
components of a structure, or even for purposes such as finding the best
location to install a skylights.
If the total of the drywall we remove for that purpose, added to the
square footage of drywall that was subjected to the renovation in the
approved plan, exceeds the allowable square footage in that approved
plan, the owner may well find himself being suddenly forced to install
an expensive fire sprinkler system, or is some cases, and as extreme as
it may sound, rebuild the entire structure ... I'm not kidding, but I
wish I was.
(A couple of years back I did a $250,000 remodel of a home in one of the
mini cities West of Houston where I had to constantly monitor what we
did with the walls to preclude triggering one of these dictated
"upgrade" requirements based on both the square footage, and percentage
value of the renovation with regard to the home's appraised value ...
(Leon may not remember that part of it, but it was the same project his
now infamous "Domino Drawers came to light <g> ))
There you have just one of the reasons why 'wet stamped" drawings are
often required now for "purposes other than structural" for permit
approval in some places.
Yep, you're right ... this is government gone wild, but they get away
with it because you allow it.
Sucks, eh? But a fact of life, so get used to it, or rebel.
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On 3/28/2014 7:47 PM, Swingman wrote:
> On 3/28/2014 3:27 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>
>> I'm not arguing permits. I am not against the permits.
>> What I don't understand is why paneling requires a permit? That seems
>> odd, as it is not structural.
>
>> And why a contractor could not provide the design/layout for a
>> non-structural change for the permit.
>
> Both can likely be answered by the same concept in vogue these days
> among many urban jurisdictions.
>
> In the guise of "safety", many jurisdictions now have ordinances in
> place that require certain things be done, like installation of fire
> sprinkler systems, if the total cost, or total square footage, involved
> in a renovation exceeds a certain percentage of the square footage of a
> home, or a certain percentage of the value of the home.
>
> In some cases these calculations, part of the required plan
> review/approval for permit process, are even figured on a room by room
> basis.
>
> An example - in some jurisdictions hereabouts we can easily, and
> inadvertently, run afoul of these plan based requirements when simply
> removing a 2sf section of drywall in a ceiling to determine load bearing
> components of a structure, or even for purposes such as finding the best
> location to install a skylights.
>
> If the total of the drywall we remove for that purpose, added to the
> square footage of drywall that was subjected to the renovation in the
> approved plan, exceeds the allowable square footage in that approved
> plan, the owner may well find himself being suddenly forced to install
> an expensive fire sprinkler system, or is some cases, and as extreme as
> it may sound, rebuild the entire structure ... I'm not kidding, but I
> wish I was.
>
> (A couple of years back I did a $250,000 remodel of a home in one of the
> mini cities West of Houston where I had to constantly monitor what we
> did with the walls to preclude triggering one of these dictated
> "upgrade" requirements based on both the square footage, and percentage
> value of the renovation with regard to the home's appraised value ...
> (Leon may not remember that part of it, but it was the same project his
> now infamous "Domino Drawers came to light <g> ))
>
> There you have just one of the reasons why 'wet stamped" drawings are
> often required now for "purposes other than structural" for permit
> approval in some places.
>
> Yep, you're right ... this is government gone wild, but they get away
> with it because you allow it.
>
> Sucks, eh? But a fact of life, so get used to it, or rebel.
>
I certainly did allow it. I think goverment has gone too far in most all
cases, or not enough in others (like politicians should have the same
rules that us PEON's have).
--
Jeff
On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 17:56:23 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>Around here they use Sat photos to see any improvements.
Of course they would with you. Your pink house would stand out like a
sore thumb.
:)
On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 23:00:03 -0400, Ed Pawlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 3/28/2014 2:12 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>> 2 actually.
>> 1 My town requires a permit to put paneling on your walls. Is this
>> normal? NOt that I am putting paneling up, but it seems odd to require
>> it... why would it be required aside from the money grab.
>>
>> 2 My town will not allow contractors to draw and design mods even if not
>> structural unless they have an architecture /engineer license. But the
>> home owner is allowed to draw / design.. Is this normal too?
>>
>> I would think most contractors would be better than a homeowner.
>>
>
>I've never gotten a permit for interior work in my own house. OTOH, I
>saw a homeowner wire all the receptacles he added using lamp cord. He
>was going to put up paneling.
I haven't either. The only permit I've taken out was to build a
garage. Amazingly, it came in at $9,999.99. ;-)
Yeah, I've seen houses wired with zip cord. OTOH, I've also seen some
pretty shoddy work from original builders, too. I've found serious
issues with every house I've owned. I do a far better job than the
original electricians of any of them did.
>When doing commercial work, we did get permits for anything but small jobs.
Sure. The stakes are a lot higher than a homeowner putting up a few
sheets of paneling.
On Friday, March 28, 2014 1:12:54 PM UTC-5, woodchucker wrote:
*> Is this normal?=20
*I'm not a contractor, but I play one on the internet. :)
(Just couldn't resist that!).
I'm a stickler for getting permits and having a certified contractor do the=
work, but I have done lots of small projects, myself. In my area, permits=
aren't expensive. The last electrical permits, I had, cost $2 per circuit=
. I don't recall, for sure, but my construction permits may have cost $10 =
per minimum-moderate size improvement project. In the case of my shop remo=
del, since it's taking me so long to do it, I have to update the permits (w=
ith fee) every 6 months. The physical effort(s), to get them, were/is nomi=
nal, also. =20
My analogy: it's easier to smile, than to frown; It's less effort, all aro=
und, to be nice, than to be mean. Sometimes, when I hear of folks trying t=
o save money or dodge rules and regs (or aspects of), I get a sense that th=
ey may cut corners with the actual work or construction, also. As Karl es=
sentially says, the standards are in place for a number of good reasons (pe=
rsonal & community safety, quality, etc.), though some R&Rs seem foolish.
Probably the best bet, if/when in doubt, is simply to ask and learn, before=
diving into a project. Inquiring and learning doesn't cost a thing, usual=
ly, and being best prepared is mind-settling, as well.=20
Sonny
On 3/28/2014 8:01 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> Oops that should have been " I certainly didn't allow it.."
Freudian slip? ;)
--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://www.google.com/+eWoodShop
https://plus.google.com/+KarlCaillouet/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)
On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 20:06:38 -0400, woodchucker <[email protected]>
wrote:
>I certainly did allow it. I think goverment has gone too far in most all
>cases, or not enough in others (like politicians should have the same
>rules that us PEON's have).
Well how about a rule after you have served your time in congress, you
get a free vacation in a minimum security facility.
Mark
On 3/28/2014 2:12 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> 2 actually.
> 1 My town requires a permit to put paneling on your walls. Is this
> normal? NOt that I am putting paneling up, but it seems odd to require
> it... why would it be required aside from the money grab.
>
> 2 My town will not allow contractors to draw and design mods even if not
> structural unless they have an architecture /engineer license. But the
> home owner is allowed to draw / design.. Is this normal too?
>
> I would think most contractors would be better than a homeowner.
>
I would be moving. I am not a contractor, but that sounds way too invasive.
--
Froz...
The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.
FrozenNorth wrote:
> On 3/28/2014 2:12 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>> 2 actually.
>> 1 My town requires a permit to put paneling on your walls. Is this
>> normal? NOt that I am putting paneling up, but it seems odd to require
>> it... why would it be required aside from the money grab.
Maybe it's an invitation to raise your property taxes (aside
from just the money for the permit)?
>>
>> 2 My town will not allow contractors to draw and design mods even if not
>> structural unless they have an architecture /engineer license. But the
>> home owner is allowed to draw / design.. Is this normal too?
>>
>> I would think most contractors would be better than a homeowner.
>>
> I would be moving. I am not a contractor, but that sounds way too
> invasive.
>
On 3/28/2014 1:12 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> 2 actually.
> 1 My town requires a permit to put paneling on your walls. Is this
> normal? NOt that I am putting paneling up, but it seems odd to require
> it... why would it be required aside from the money grab.
>
> 2 My town will not allow contractors to draw and design mods even if not
> structural unless they have an architecture /engineer license. But the
> home owner is allowed to draw / design.. Is this normal too?
...
1) For that alone w/ no other improvement does seem a little over the
top, agreed. Can't say as to how unique it might be; many places are
pretty limited on what doesn't need one.
2) Virtually all places have exemptions for single-residence
owner-exemptions. I think it's been litigated they can't completely
stop an individual's right for their own property if they're not doing
something to somebody else (like a renter).
--
On 3/28/14, 3:27 PM, woodchucker wrote:
> What I don't understand is why paneling requires a permit? That seems
> odd, as it is not structural.
>
The only thing I can think of is fireproofing. Wood paneling doesn't
retard the spread of fire like sheetrock does. It is possible they
would want it treated with a fire retardant spray, or even put up *over*
sheetrock to keep the fire rating of the wall hee same.
--
-MIKE-
"Playing is not something I do at night, it's my function in life"
--Elvin Jones (1927-2004)
--
http://mikedrums.com
[email protected]
---remove "DOT" ^^^^ to reply
On 3/28/2014 11:00 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 3/28/2014 2:12 PM, woodchucker wrote:
>> 2 actually.
>> 1 My town requires a permit to put paneling on your walls. Is this
>> normal? NOt that I am putting paneling up, but it seems odd to require
>> it... why would it be required aside from the money grab.
>>
>> 2 My town will not allow contractors to draw and design mods even if not
>> structural unless they have an architecture /engineer license. But the
>> home owner is allowed to draw / design.. Is this normal too?
>>
>> I would think most contractors would be better than a homeowner.
>>
>
> I've never gotten a permit for interior work in my own house. OTOH, I
> saw a homeowner wire all the receptacles he added using lamp cord. He
> was going to put up paneling.
>
> When doing commercial work, we did get permits for anything but small jobs.
Only permit I have been required to pull was for a panel upgrade, 100
square foot shed and under requires no permit, I check the city's
website for limits and sizes before I do anything.
I have added several circuits to the panel since the upgrade, which was
done my an electrician friend of mine. Couple years ago had a floating
neutral, turns out the problem was outside of the house, city problem,
they came and checked my panel first, the guy popped it open, poked and
prodded, buttoned it back up and said "This is the best looking panel I
have seen in a long time", we will have a crew here shortly to track it
down outside.
--
Froz...
The system will be down for 10 days for preventive maintenance.
"woodchucker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Yea they are kind of wierd here, they would not let me
> surface the walls in my shop with plywood, due to fire
> risk. But I had to use ply as a firestop every 10 feet
> between the studs and the concrete, and caulk it. So why
> is it good as a firestop, but not for a wall treatment?
Because as a firestop its purpose is to restrict air to a fire within the
walls.
--
dadiOH
____________________________
Winters getting colder? Tired of the rat race?
Taxes out of hand? Maybe just ready for a change?
Check it out... http://www.floridaloghouse.net
woodchucker wrote:
> 2 actually.
> 1 My town requires a permit to put paneling on your walls. Is this
> normal? NOt that I am putting paneling up, but it seems odd to require
> it... why would it be required aside from the money grab.
>
> 2 My town will not allow contractors to draw and design mods even if not
> structural unless they have an architecture /engineer license. But the
> home owner is allowed to draw / design.. Is this normal too?
>
> I would think most contractors would be better than a homeowner.
>
I built a small greenhouse from scratch using corrugated plastic
sheets over a frame--white for the roof and translucent for the sides.
No contractor, no permit.
The next year our taxes increased. We went down and contested it.
They had pictures of the house from every side and a picture of the
greenhouse. We have a high solid fence around the back yard but
someone had gotten a picture without our knowing it.
They did back off on the taxes though.
--
GW Ross
Danger! **Attention Span Exceeded!**
On 3/30/2014 2:04 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> We have a mixed bag of requirements on that here in San Antonio. We are large city that has expanded to engulf many smaller cities and incorporations. All of them have their own rules and regulations.
>
> In San Antonio itself, you can perform just about any kind of >>repairs or maintenance<< you want yourself as long as you conform to the Southern Building Codes. You can paint, fix your fence, replace a window, fix your roof, plant grass, replace a faucet, and install paneling if you want with no permits.
>
> But you cannot change the profile of the domicile in any way. So no room additions, no patio covers, no fireplaces, no dormers, etc. Also, no mechanical work of any kind. While you can replace an electrical plug or switch (considered maintenance)or replace a light fixture, you can't do much else without a permit. No circuits, wiring of any type or replacement or upgrade of service without permits and inspections. Same guidelines for plumbing and air conditioning.
>
> The catch? If a city building inspector or code compliance officer drives by and you are doing more than allowed or are not doing it to Southern Building Code (and San Antonio local codes)they can make you stop on the spot. A ticket follows that depending on the violation can generate up to a $5000 fine. Also, no work can commence until a full, written scope of work submitted by a city licensed contractor, and if needed, drawings. Those have to be approved by the city. To add to the cost, you have 10 days to comply and may not do anything to the stopped work without risking further fines. Also, since it is now considered an "expedited" project, approval fees double, inspection fees double, and all fines must be paid up front before work can commence.
>
> That's the penalties for a homeowner. As a contractor, it is much nastier and they can prevent you from working at all if you are a repeat offender.
>
> On the other hand, some of our little encapsulated burgs require permits for anything. I mean anything. They do NO inspections during or at the end of the job unless it is a huge job. If it is a roof, siding replacement, windows, etc., you apply for a permit at which time you "promise" to install the item specified to the manufacturer's specifications and in compliance with all applicable codes. While they do no follow up, they will fine you as much as they can if they catch you doing anything without a permit.
>
So that's a money grab.. they are not even ensuring it's built correct.
So what are you getting for your money?
> Personally, I am of a mixed mind on this subject. Overwhelmed homeowners that want to play contractor after watching a steady diet of tattooed, pierced 20 somethings and bossy women that can run rough shod over experienced contractors on TV make up about 1/3 of my clients. Unless these folks were bold/foolish enough to play contractor they wouldn't be nearly as grateful to me for taking charge when they have enough of it all. I get a lot of referrals simply from folks that start a project, can't finish it, and someone gives them my name. Works for me.
>
> The other aspect of it is that once folks get screwed by a fly by night unqualified contractor they are usually much easier to work with and will pay more to get more. I hate to see a homeowner that wants to try something new for themselves or is trying to be more self reliant get screwed. Likewise if they just don't have the money to hire a professional to do some maintenance. But I can't help but laugh when one of these TV educated contractors gets a REAL education in contracting and code compliance in the real world.
>
> Robert
>
--
Jeff