Replies

1. 
   brownbagg | Jan 08, 2004 04:01pm | #1

   It depends on your civil servants, here it takes about 12 minute. fill out the address pay the fee.

   The best employee you can have but you wouldn't want him as a neighbor " He the shifty type"

2. 
   davidmeiland | Jan 08, 2004 06:13pm | #2

   Is your permit over-the-counter or does it need plan-checking? Stuff with engineering, zoning implications, etc. is usually plan-checked. Simple stuff within the walls sometimes isn't, it all depends on the town you're in and their policies. There's usually a stated period of time (2-6 weeks in my experience) that they set aside for plan checking. They go quicker if there's not much to do, and slower if there is. If you leave stuff out on the plans and submittals they ask for clarification and then start the clock over.

   You might be able to find and hire a 'permit expeditor', someone who knows how to get it done quickly and pushes it through for you. If I needed to find one I think I'd call a large architect's office in town and ask them.

3. 
   joeh | Jan 08, 2004 06:33pm | #3

   Tip # 1 is "Don't piss 'em off"

   Tip #  2 is "They have a long memory"

   Tip # 3 "Like all who are employeed by the government, their job is to mess with you"

   Good luck.

   Joe H

1. 
   BUSTER | Jan 09, 2004 04:42am | #5

   As one of those dirtbag 'spectors..I'll agree w/ the 1st two on your list :)

1. 
   benjycompson | Jan 09, 2004 05:22am | #6

   Well, I got booted off of JLC's forum a while back for bringing it up but IMNSHO publicly funded building inspectors are a net impediment to productivity. Best wishes.

1. 
   VaTom | Jan 09, 2004 05:40am | #7

   Well, I got booted off of JLC's forum a while back for bringing it up but IMNSHO publicly funded building inspectors are a net impediment to productivity.

   Libertarian?PAHS Designer/Builder- Bury it!

2. 
   bobtim | Jan 09, 2004 05:47am | #8

   Sounds to me like you might be an impediment to your own productivity.

1. 
   benjycompson | Jan 09, 2004 04:48pm | #11

   Tim, good point. pragmatism vs idealism... in the real world the pragmatist will put food on the table. 

2. 
   brownbagg | Jan 09, 2004 04:52pm | #12

   Don't feel bad, I got booted out of the permit office. All they are around here is somebody brother in law that can't get a job at walmart.

   Oh yea i have a 9:00 meeting at the permit office, better get going.

   The best employee you can have but you wouldn't want him as a neighbor " He the shifty type"

3. 
   brownbagg | Jan 10, 2004 12:53am | #13

   what type inspector are you, private, county, city etc. What state you operate out of. Stay close I got tons of questions.

   The best employee you can have but you wouldn't want him as a neighbor " He the shifty type"

4. 
   BUSTER | Jan 10, 2004 07:33am | #16

   Hey Brownbag..

   Employed by the State of Oregon (Building Clodes Division).  Located in the Columbia Gorge / North-Eastern Oregon (The Dalles and Pendleton offices..to be exact). I am a residential structural/manufactured home construction/installation inspector and residential plan reviewer.  My main office here in The Dalles kicks the commercial to our main office in Salem (although a few get sent to Pendleton).  Great area to be in !!

   Hope I can help answer some of your questions if needed. 

   Take care.

5. 
   brownbagg | Jan 10, 2004 06:00pm | #22

   What I alway have question about, I myself work for a civil has inspector for geotechinical testing lab dealing with concrete, soils and foundations. Because the local school board does not pay permit fees the county and city will not look at foundation, rebar, etc. I must sign off, with of course the P.E. blessing. I have also done this on commerical project when the local inspectot tied up or sick.

   My question is. What requlation let me do this. Not really code but operating requlation.

   It not a preblem because I know , way more than the local guy does on foundation, I just want to know the legal end of it.

   The best employee you can have but you wouldn't want him as a neighbor " He the shifty type"

6. 
   BUSTER | Jan 10, 2004 08:27pm | #23

   Hey again BROWNBAG..to answer your question on whether its legal or not to sign-off primarily depends on the jurisdiction, as well as what agreement(s) are relating to inspections/process. In Oregon the BO (building official) has alot of latitude regarding the inspections.  If the PE on record is signing off..you are probably going to be ok (since it is he who could get slammed !). In the residential & mh arena..I have permitted contractors and private inspectors to sign-off areas (w/them knowing fully their responsibility). As for not having the locals review/inspect the work being performed..for compliance reasons: I'd suggest speaking to the local jurisdiction and the PE (another set of eyes can be good). I've done this several times..BCD is contracted to just review inspect what's being done.  This is what I consider "cyb" (cover your behind)..the way some like to litigate for whatever reason they see.  As for your knowledge exceeding that of the local...Great ! (maybe, maybe not he can bone-up).  Our area is seeing significant increase in ICF & steel construction..I have to admit that some know way more than I..which causes me to crack the books BEFORE I go on site (and get slammed). If the project is significant I'll request input from BCD's engineer and/or my BO.  Life is constantly a learning process. 

4. 
   BUSTER | Jan 09, 2004 04:38am | #4

   What Davidmeiland said is right..if the plans submitted are complete..your turnaround time should be MUCH faster.  In my office (small..just two of us structural 'spectors) if the plans are actually complete..we would/should be able to kick them out w/o any delay.  I find the biggest issue w/ some is their interpretation of "complete" plans...the word complete tends to be subjective to those submitting them and to those doing the review.  At the time you submit them..try to "collar" the person doing the review..then see if he can do a "quicky" review making sure all you're submitting SHOULD be adequate.

   Good LUCK..

5. 
   WorkshopJon | Jan 09, 2004 05:49am | #9

   "Anybody got any tricks for getting a building permit fast."

   ACE,

   The building inspector (depending on the area of course) can be you friend or enemy. Mine volunteered (after asking him for advice on "what HE would like to see") to rush my last permit through, (took 1 week) told me what was important to him (and what were his "pet peeves"). I LISTENED and remembered what he said. Inspections took 10 minutes, and passed the first time.

   Jon

6. 
   Piffin | Jan 09, 2004 06:42am | #10

   Jon has it right.

   Key is communication. If you set them up as the enemy they will see you coming and get your enema ready for you.

   I used to get permits out of an office that had a normal three week turnaround.

   I visited ahead to find out what they would expect

   Then I did my homework

   Then I hand carried the plans in at the right time of day ( they have their rush times too and you will not have anyone's attention when there is a long line.)

   I didn't just drop off the plans. I laid them out for an interpretation session. a bit of personal visiting. Nine times out of ten, They would volunteer to speed it up for me since they could see it all right.

   .

   Excellence is its own reward!

7. 
   JohnSprung | Jan 10, 2004 02:23am | #14

   Here it depends on whether the job is big or little.  For little jobs you can get an over the counter permit in 15 - 20 minutes.  For jobs that require plan check, you really need a professional permit puller to do it for you.  My structural engineer does permit pulling, too.

   -- J.S.

8. 
   fdampier5 | Jan 10, 2004 06:20am | #15

   I went from one extreme to the other.  My first permit took me so long to get that I actually missed the building season and when finally granted prevented me from starting right away the next year! (another project took most of my time.)

       My most recent permit took less than 5 minutes..  achieved with a sketch on a sheet of paper.. .

     the differance was the relationship that I had built with my inspector and his understanding that I would rather sell my children than cut a corner or do anything unsafe..

     I have a standing invitation for the inspector to stop by at his convineance and I'll gladly stop what I'm doing and give him a tour of my latest achievements.

     It helps that I am doing anything but ordinary construction so it has interest even to a inspector  who spends every working day on construction sites..

     

1. 
   4Lorn2 | Jan 10, 2004 07:57am | #17

   A cordial and friendly, or at the very least civil and functional, relationship with the inspectors is important. I have found that inspectors can be a valuable resource or your worse critic.

   They can turn you onto information resources most people have little access to. Often they can make suggestions as to methods that have worked in similar situations. Most are really nice people who are under staggering time and political pressure. They are trying to perform a valuable public service, one that saves lives, lowers insurance and liability costs, under difficult conditions.

   On the other hand, particularly if you try to trick them or lie to them, they can bring you to your knees. Worse case something simple like a ground rod can stop production. Inspector walks up to the ground rod and asks how long it is. You say 8'. He says 'prove it'.

   Inspector is well within his right to ask. Unscrupulous electricians have been known to cut a ground rod in half to save time, trouble and money. Of course this is seldom an issue with a tradesman that the inspector thinks he can trust. For those who are seen in a dim light it can be a tough time having to prove everything because they are untrustworthy.

   Fairly rare, even more rare as inspection departments have been defunded and inspectors told not to interfere with builders for anything less than a clear and present life safety issues, contractors have lost money, jobs and gone out of business for lack of trust.

   It says a lot as to the quality of the work you do having a friendly relationship with the inspectors. It always amazes me the number of contractors who treat the inspectors as the enemy. I don't trust contractors with this attitude.

1. 
   benjycompson | Jan 10, 2004 02:48pm | #19

   There will always be a certain amount of animosity between different the different levels of supervision from the ditchdigger all the way up the scale to the bank.

   My pet peeve, is the fact that they are <i>public</i> inspectors, and are funded with taxmoney, and as a result enjoy a special privileged link in the chain. This is the source of much of the animosity you see between building inspectors and the public.

   In my idealistic world, there wouldn't be any publicly funded building inspectors. It would be the responsibility of those that fund the project to satisfy the saftey and quality concerns of those that insure the project, and to satisfy the concerns of those that would purchase the product. The private market would do a much better job at a better price.

   I agree with most of the suggestions here of ways to smooth human relationships and to make the system as we have it generally more efficient, but IMHO the real problem is in the (tax funded) system itself.

   best wishes

1. 
   Schelling | Jan 10, 2004 03:54pm | #20

   One of the main purposes of the building code is to protect people from themselves. This is the reason that the building codes need to be enforced by a public official. Everyone else has a financial incentive to circumvent the code or at least parts of it. Unless you are willing to let people take responsibility for their own foolish decisions you need to have the government involved. It is obvious which way we have chosen to go.

1. 
   benjycompson | Jan 10, 2004 11:10pm | #24

   Schellingm- you wrote "Everyone else has a financial incentive to circumvent the code or at least parts of it. Unless you are willing to let people take responsibility for their own foolish decisions you need to have the government involved."

   That is exactly my point. Government oversight does not allow for people to take responsibility for their own foolish decisions. It is called moral hazard. People should be allowed to HAVE a financial incentive in whatever they do., making them more directly responsible and accountable for their actions.

2. 
   Schelling | Jan 11, 2004 01:11am | #28

   "People should be allowed to HAVE a financial incentive in whatever they do., making them more directly responsible and accountable for their actions."

   You and I might agree on what SHOULD be, but we the people have decided differently and that is why building codes have proliferated. As a contractor I try not to worry about the societal implications of this but about how I can most easily deal with this reality. The answer that I have found is to develop a good relationship with the building inspector, to build my projects to exceed code requirements whenever possible and to use the code requirements as an incentive for the homeowner who would otherwise be inclined to cut corners. In that sense I am a little bit like the code, protecting the cheap homeowner from himself, whether he likes it or not.

3. 
   benjycompson | Jan 11, 2004 05:35am | #31

   "You and I might agree on what SHOULD be, but we the people have decided differently and that is why building codes have proliferated. As a contractor I try not to worry about the societal implications of this but about how I can most easily deal with this reality. The answer that I have found is to develop a good relationship with the building inspector, to build my projects to exceed code requirements whenever possible and to use the code requirements as an incentive for the homeowner who would otherwise be inclined to cut corners. In that sense I am a little bit like the code, protecting the cheap homeowner from himself, whether he likes it or not."

   SCHELLINGM, Absolutely. Pragmatic.

    I suppose I am more idealistic, but also I believe that to foment change we must first acknowledge the truth, and then take positive steps. Sorry if it sounds too preachy.

    

   View Image Options

    View ImageReply

    

    

    

4. 
   davidmeiland | Jan 11, 2004 10:53pm | #33

   Societal.

   Social.

   I want to know the difference. May have a dictionary around here somwhere.

2. 
   WorkshopJon | Jan 10, 2004 05:39pm | #21

   "In my idealistic world, there wouldn't be any publicly funded building inspectors....The private market would do a much better job at a better price."

   Cash,

   Don't know where you're coming from with that comment. In most areas, the permitting fees are high enough to cover most of the cost of the inspection process. Furthermore, in matters of public safety.........well, that's what government is for.

   Jon

1. 
   benjycompson | Jan 10, 2004 11:19pm | #25

   Jon,

   All costs must be considered. Taxation imposes a blanket cost to society. Innefficiencies due to government red tape, paperwork,  irresponsibility, and the moral hazard created must also be considered.

   My idea of what government is for is to protect and defend my liberty. The less it does at all levels, the better.

2. 
   WorkshopJon | Jan 11, 2004 12:06am | #26

   "Government oversight does not allow for people to take responsibility for their own foolish decisions."

   "All costs must be considered. Taxation imposes a blanket cost to society."......." yada, yada, yada "..."

   Cash,

   Are you over 20 years old?

   Jon

3. 
   benjycompson | Jan 11, 2004 12:40am | #27

   Hey Jon,

   Actually, I am 50. Are you meaning to say that the hi-lighted statements are immature? Please explain.

4. 
   WorkshopJon | Jan 11, 2004 01:12am | #29

   "Are you meaning to say that the hi-lighted statements are immature?"

   Cash,

   You are what you are, and     "Please explain."

   Sorry, but no, that would be rude to the originator of this thread who wanted to discuss how to speed up the permitting process. I suggest you start a thread in the "Tavern" and see where it goes if that's what you came here to chat about.

   Jon

   Edited 1/10/2004 5:53:46 PM ET by WorkshopJon

3. 
   fdampier5 | Jan 11, 2004 05:34am | #30

   tax funding works.. case in point, can you imagine the military without tax funding?   "I'm sorry we won't fight that war because it might not prove profitable"   OK tax funding is needed to control the nations airwaves.. Privatefunding?  who's rule do you comply with? the landing airport or the airport you are over.. What if Kansas were to demand a toll to cross over it's airspace? 

      how about guarding the borders?  private enterprise job or one for the government?

         Most homes last longer than the orignal owners.. what sort of resale value would a home have if no-one could be certain that the house didn't comply with some sort of minimum standards.

       Based on your idea if a bank in California were to lend the builder the funds to build should the private inspector comply with california specifications or perhaps Wisconsin standards regarding construction?  What if one builder is self funding?  does that mean he can build the walls out of marshmellows if he chooses?

     Standards and regulations serve a vital function you really should learn to live in a complex society that depends on those rules instead of trying to beat the system constantly..

1. 
   benjycompson | Jan 11, 2004 06:05am | #32

   frenchy, too many questions to answer here at once. The short answer is yes, indeed I can envision private substitutions for the things you mention. I have taken workshop's advice and moved to the tavern. My apologies to the thread's originator for the drift.... 

4. 
   4Lorn2 | Jan 12, 2004 09:48am | #34

   Free enterprise and private sector inspectors have a place. Taxpayer financed inspectors have a unique position and a place also. They are not hired by, financed or beholding to either the HOs or builders. They are a value to both while being directly controlled by neither.

   Private sector inspectors always, even when they shouldn't, know and favor those who pay their way. Too often I have seen protracted battles between sellers and buyers of homes with private  inspectors being uses to make claims and counter claims in an attempt to modify the sale price or conditions.

   Taxpayer financed inspectors are not entirely independent, building associations and real estate interests try mightily to limit the power and scope of public service inspectors but for now they are as close to independent as we can get.

9. 
   toast953 | Jan 10, 2004 08:51am | #18

   Anybody got any tricks for getting a building permit fast.  I will ask,, define fast. How long have you owned the dirt, been working on your blueprints? How long will it take to get your project to the framing stage (less permitting time)? How long do the drywaller get? How soon you going to pay this new home off?? How much are you going to pay Building Dept. if, maybe, they find some expensive error's/oversight in the blueprint stage. Acecan, what works for me, is, I keep a bottle of patience pills in my truck, I pop two of those pills when ever I will be dealing with the Building Dept. Good Luck and be safe out there,, Jim J