December, 2002

We still get questions about when permits are required. The code used to be very "un-descriptive" when describing when a building permit was required. Section 107.1 of the 1996 BOCA Building Code required a permit to be issued prior to the start of construction for all of the following; (1) Construct or alter a structure, (2) Construct an addition, (3) Demolish or move a structure, (4) Make a change of occupancy, (5) Install or alter any equipment regulated by the code or (6) Move a lot line which affects an existing structure. Section 107.1.1 then stated that, "Application or notice to the code official is not required for ordinary repairs to structures. Such repairs shall not include . . . ." Conveniently, the code never went on to indicate what "ordinary repairs" did include. As a result, my practice over the years has been to include work such as; (1) New roof coverings on an existing building and (2) New exterior siding on an existing building, as "ordinary repair" and I did not require a permit for such work.

Now, under the new code, Section R105.2 spells out in great detail the work that exempt from permit requirements for the building, electrical, mechanical and plumbing trades. Building permits are not required for; (1) one story detached accessory structures with a floor area of 200 sq ft or less, (2) a fence not more than 6 feet high, (3) a retaining wall not more than 4 feet high measured from the bottom of the footing to the top of the wall, (4) a ground supported water tank with a capacity of 5,000 gallons or less if the ratio of height to diameter or width is not greater than 2 to 1, (5) a sidewalk or driveway at grade, (6) painting, papering, tiling, carpeting, cabinets, counter tops, and similar finish work, (7) A swimming pool less than 24" deep, (8) swings and playground equipment accessory to a residence and (9) window awnings.

As you can see, new roof shingles and new siding are not on the list of work exempt from requiring a building permit. I find that I have no option but to start requiring building permits for this work. Some of your members may already have received letters from me requesting permits for re-shingling a roof or re-siding a residence. I understand that this is a new requirement and the contractors doing this work are not used to obtaining permits. If this is work that is only part of a larger project, (new residence, etc), then it does not require a separate permit. It is covered under the permit for the larger project. It only requires a separate permit if the re-siding or re-shingling is the only work being done.

As we see the work happening, we send out letters requesting that a permit be obtained. If we do not know who is doing the work, we communicate directly with the owner. If we know who is doing the work we will attempt to communicate with the contractor first. I am hopeful that in time applications will be submitted in the normal course of doing business, as the word gets out that a building permit is required. I don't expect that it will take a very long time for that to happen. In fact, this column is my attempt to help get the word out. As always, if there are any questions or concerns in this regard, please let me know.

October, 2002

I am hearing there are some complaints regarding some of our administrative procedures in issuing permits, particularly building permits. Let me try to explain what we do and why we do it. I am hopeful that the procedures and policies I have instituted are guided by the administrative provisions of the codes. As always, I am open to receiving any suggestions and input, positive or negative, regarding these policies and procedures.

As you are certainly aware, there are a whole range of permits required in order to build a building here in Emmet County, (zoning, septic, well, drive, soil erosion, etc). When processing a building permit application it is my policy to require all other applicable permits to be issued prior to the issuance of the building permit. Section 105.3.1 of the building code requires that I, ". . . examine . . . applications for permits . . . within a reasonable time after filing. . . . If the building official is satisfied that the proposed work conforms to the . . . laws and ordinances applicable thereto, the building official shall issue a permit . . . as soon as practicable." By requiring these other permits to be issued prior to issuing the building permit, it is my intent to not have money spent on construction prior to knowing that the work can be done in compliance with the requirements of these other agencies.

It normally takes us a week or 10 days to process a building permit application from the time we receive it. I would encourage you to submit your applications as soon as possible in advance of your desire to start construction. We do not require any money when you submit the application. When the application is processed, you are notified of the amount of the building permit fee and whatever other permits are required.

In determining what other permits are required, we use the requirements of the other agencies. For example, drive permits are required for county roads by the Emmet County Road commission. The drive permit requirements have just been revised. A drive permit is required in the following 4 situations: (1) a new house, mobile home or modular home; (2) a new commercial business or expansion of an existing business resulting in additional traffic; (3) any work to be done in the road right-of-way; (4) a change in use from residential to commercial or changing from one home using a drive to a shared drive or private road serving more than one home. A drive permit will no longer be necessary for additions, garages, etc.

Zoning permits are required whenever there is, (1) a new building; (2) an addition to the footprint or the height of the building; (3) a change in use according to the zoning ordinance. It is best to check with the zoning department for the jurisdiction. The county zoning covers many townships, but the cities, some villages and some townships have their own zoning ordinances. They are all different. Typically, alterations to existing buildings do not require zoning approval.

The Health Department requires a well permit whenever a new well is installed. A septic permit, existing septic evaluation is required wherever there is no public sewer available and, (1) a new building contains plumbing facilities; (2) there is an addition to an existing residence with more than 200 sf of living space. A privy permit may be allowed for cabins with seasonal occupancy.

Finally, soil erosion permits are required whenever, (1) the earth is being disturbed within 500 feet of a lake or stream; (2) more than 1 acre of land is being disturbed anywhere. The same department takes care of the few properties classified as, "critical dunes" and "high risk erosion" areas. There are also requirement regarding storm water based upon new impervious surfaces being created on a piece of property. These are also handled thru the Soil Erosion Department.

As you can see, the building permit is the point of control for all the other construction permits. I guess that makes me the "bad guy". Please understand that I am simply attempting to insure that no-one is going to tell you that you can not build it after you have started construction.

June, 2002

There has been a lot of discussion recently about building on severely sloped sites. The Emmet County Planning and Zoning Department is currently working on revisions in their zoning ordinance to deal with these sites. The 2000 Michigan Residential Code has a section, R403.1.7, that deals with footings on or adjacent to slopes. I thought this would be an opportune time to try to explain what the building code provisions require.

To start with, the building code section only applies when there is a slope greater than 1 in 3, (a 33.3% slope). Just as a point of reference, the slopes encountered along the shoreline north of Harbor Springs, (West Traverse, Friendship, Readmond & Cross Village Townships), range in the neighborhood of 60% to no more than 100%, (a 45 degree angle).

When building at the bottom of a slope, section R403.1.7.1 requires a setback away from the toe or bottom of the slope that is at least ½ of the total height of the slope, but not more than 15'. Therefore, if the total height of the slope is greater than 30', then the face of the building at the bottom must be at least 15' from the bottom of the slope. Should the slope be greater than 100%, (a 45 degree angle), then the bottom of the slope is considered to be at the point where a 45 degree angle, tangent to the top of the slope, meets a horizontal line drawn from the top of the building foundation. The required setback would be measured from that imaginary point. If a retaining wall is constructed at the bottom of the slope, then the total height of the slope is measured from the top of the retaining wall.

When building on or adjacent to the top of sloped surfaces, section R403.1.7.2 requires the bottom of the footing to be 1/3 of the total height of the slope back from the slope at the elevation of the footing. For example, if the height of the slope is 99', the footing must extend down to a depth that will be back from the slope at least 33' at the depth of the footing. If the slope is 67%, (2 down to 3 horizontal), and our front footing wants to be 12' beyond the top of the slope, (actually on the slope). The grade at the front wall is already 8' down from the top of the slope. The footing must now extend at least 22' more into the ground, (30' below the top of the slope), so that the elevation of the slope at this depth is 33' in front of the footing. By doing this, it is possible to meet the provisions of the code and build on a severe slope without getting involved with a professional engineer.

Section R403.1.7.4 allows me to accept alternate solutions as long as they have been designed by a professional engineer. This is usually the case I have experienced for those buildings that are built on the bluff north of Harbor Springs.

On a totally different subject, I would like to briefly mention a change that our office has had to make to accommodate another change in the 2000 Michigan Residential Code. When permits are required. The previous code identified "ordinary repairs" as being exempt from requiring a permit. It did not define what ordinary repairs were, but rather it told us what they were not! We were thereby able to consider new roof coverings and new exterior siding as "ordinary repair", and not require permits for this work. Section R105.2 of the 2000 Michigan Residential Code is very specific in defining "work exempt from a permit". As a result we now must require permits for re-roofing and re-siding work. So, don't be surprised when we communicate with your roofing and siding contractors to tell then they now need a permit for this work. As always, we appreciate your continued cooperation.

May, 2002

I'm going to try to explain section R602.10, wall bracing. The MRC has 5 pages of text, tables and figures in this section, but it isn't as complicated as it may seem. The 1996 code simply said use at least two 2"x's for exterior wall corner posts and use a structural panel sheathing or some other method of diagonal corner bracing to resist the wind loads. The bulk of the country was exempted from having to design residences to resist seismic forces.

In the MRC, Seismic design catagories A & B and areas with wind speeds of 100 mph or less, (the bulk of the country), have wall bracing requirements that are just a little more defined than before.

There are eight different braced wall panel construction methods identified, ranging from; (1) the let-in 1"x4" or metal strap, (2) diagonal boards, (3) structural panels, (4) structural fiberboard, (5) gypsum board, (6) particle board, (7) portland cement plaster, & (8) hardboard panel siding. The typical method we see here is structural panel sheathing.

To be considered a braced wall panel, the panel must be at least 4' in length with vertical joints on studs and horizontal joints blocked. The panels in each wall line must be within 12.5 feet of the corners. The panel width for structural panel sheathing is adjusted between 2' and 5' based upon the height of the wall and the size of an opening next to the panel. The panels must be fastened to the framing in accordance with the schedules in the code. The braced wall panels in a wall line must line up with each other with an allowed 4' off-set.

The amount of bracing required is based upon which floor you are bracing. Less bracing is needed on upper floors than lower floors. The top floor must have a braced wall panel at each end, at least every 25' o.c. and at least 16% of the length of the braced wall line. For example, if the building is 50' long you would need at least 8' of braced wall panels located within 25' of each other and within 12.5' of each corner. On the floor below the top floor you must have the same amount as the top floor if you use structural panel sheathing. If you use any other method you must brace 25% of the wall line. On the second floor below the top floor you cannot use method (1). The panel length must be 4' and they must be located at each end. Structural panel sheathing must brace 25% of the wall line and all other methods must brace at least 35%.

As you can see, if you are sheathing the entire residence with structural panel sheathing, it is just about automatic that you will be in compliance with these provisions as long as you pay a little attention to nailing, and blocking for wall heights greater than 8'.

You do not have to worry about seismic design category C or D provisions unless you are building in the southeast, the St. Louis area, or the west coast. I hope this takes some of the mystery out of the code provisions for "braced wall lines". It hasn't been a problem up here in the past and it shouldn't be in the future.

April, 2002

I thought I would use this month's column to bring you up to date with some administrative changes we have made this year in the Building Inspection Department. I guess I'll start with the bad news. We have raised our fees across the board by a little more than 15%. Our department is on a separate budget that is required by law to use our income from fees to only support this department. The county board has directed me to cover all our expenses with our fee income. In the past we have had very little trouble in doing this as we saw continuing increases in construction activity of approximately 10% each year. Last year we experienced a decline of approximately 10%, most of which occurred from September through December. As a result, our income was approximately $100,000.00 short of our expenditures.

The largest increases occurred in the electrical, mechanical and plumbing fee schedules. We have adopted the identical fees that are charges by the state for their permits. The fees for these permits had not changed in the last 8 years. The building permit fee schedule increased just over 7% with the changes we make annually to the valuation table and factor we use. There are other changes to the building permit fee schedule. Much as the sub-trade permits have an application fee of $30.00, there is not a $30.00 administrative charge added to the building permit fee calculation. The minimum building permit fee is raised from $25.00 to $50.00. Our special inspection fee is raised from $30.00 to $45.00 to equal the state fee for special inspections. The minimum fee for a moved residence, modular residence and HUD residence set-up is raised from $50.00 to $100.00. The filing fee for an appeal to our Board of Appeals is raised from $100.00 to $200.00. Finally, there will be a $30.00 charge for re-inspections when previous corrections have not been made. This becomes a wasted trip for our inspectors, and we simply cannot continue to make them.

Enough of this bad news! All our permit applications are not on line! If you go to our web site, www.co.emmet.mi.us, click on departments and then building inspection department you will see "application forms". You can print out the permit application form, fill it out and sent it in at this time. We are still working on filling it out and sending it to us on line, but we are moving in that direction.

I indicated to you last month that we can e-mail inspection reports to you. Well, there is a little glitch. When we tried it here in the office, we could e-mail reports to each other perfectly, but when we tried to sent them to you, it turns out that you need the "lotus notes" program for them to look like they are supposed to look. So, for now we will still be mailing or faxing them to you. Our Information Technology Department is working on trying to make the e-mailing of the reports work. Hopefully, we will be able to send the reports electronically in the near future.

Well, it looks like winter is coming to an end and better weather is on the way. Here's hoping the construction activity picks up for everyone.

March, 2002

We have something new at the Emmet County Building Inspection Department! Penny Marshall from our office has spent some valuable time this winter getting our department on-line! We have a web site! The address is www.co.emmet.mi.us Just click on "departments" and then "Building Department". Once there, any of the items listed that appear blue and underlined are active.

Most of the active items are informational. "Location and times" tells you where we are and when we are open. "History" tells you a little bit about the Building Inspection Department. "Permit Issuing Agencies" is a form we have available that you can see with "adobe acrobat" software and print out if you want. The same holds true for "Required Inspections". "Frequently Asked Questions" is again, informational. If you click on a question, the answer will appear. "Updating Contractor Information" is a form you can print out and mail in to us to keep your licenses current in our computer system. "Board of Appeals - How and Why?" tells you about our appeals board, who they are, what the Construction Code Act says about the board and a copy of our application for an appeal for you to print out and send in if necessary. "Inspection Requests" is still being worked on, but when it is ready, you can request inspections for jobs under construction. "Basic Code Requirements" takes you to a copy of our plan review compliance lists. Currently, only the 2000 Michigan Residential Code list is available. In time, there will be more. "Foundation Plan for Manufactured Homes (Used)" is again just a handout for use when a manufacturer's plan is no longer available. "Energy Code Compliance Worksheet" is a handout for use when the residence does not comply with the prescriptive requirements of the code. It is the same form that is in the very back of the Michigan Residential Code. "Single Story Residential Accessory Structures" is the compliance list for those buildings. "Handrails versus Guardrails" is taken from a Bureau of Construction Codes Technical Bulletin on the subject. "Code Officials Corner" will take you to the most current of the articles I prepare for this column.

The item "Related Links" allows you to go directly to the web sites for a number of state and local agencies related to the Building Inspection Department. Finally, the "Contact Us" item allows you to send any member of the Building Inspection Department staff an e-mail.

Speaking of e-mail, if you have a business e-mail address and wish to receive inspection reports, please let us know that address. Once we have your e-mail address, we will send all your inspection reports to you via e-mail. This will eliminate the delay we currently experience using the US mail. You can receive the inspection reports in a form you can print as soon as the inspectors return from the field that afternoon or the next morning.

In the future, we will be putting all our application forms on our site so you can fill them out and print them off to send to us with a check or the plans. With a few advances in technology and changes in the laws, we may someday be able to receive plans and applications to be charged to a credit card and eliminate a lot of paperwork in the more distant future. If any of you have any additional thoughts regarding our web site or possibilities for improving our service to you, please let me know.

February, 2002

I've missed a couple of months. Sorry, but it was unavoidable. I do appreciate the thoughts and concerns expressed by your members and all is well now. I've come to the conclusion that if I have parts that do not work I either replace them or remove them, whichever seems to be the most beneficial. So this time, I had my prostate removed and I'm doing just fine without it.

I thought this month it might be appropriate to talk about the new snow load provisions in the 2000 residential and building codes. As you probably know, the ground snow load designation for Emmet and Charlevoix Counties has been increased from 60 psf to 70 psf. What you may not know is that the engineering standard referenced in the code also changed from the 1995 edition to the 1998 edition of the ASCE 7 standard for minimum design loads. The standard changed the formulas to determine the amount of snow on the roof. As you might guess, it is more complicated than it used to be. The formulas employ factors that are more and more specific to a site and a particular building.

The exposure factor takes into account whether or not there are obstructions around the roof of the building. There is a new thermal factor that considers whether a building is heated or not. The roof slope factor has become a function of the thermal factor and the roof covering material in addition to the slope of the roof.

I can give you the following examples: 1. If the residence is not on waterfront property and not surrounded by pine trees, if it is heated, insulated and has a ventilated roof and if the roof surface is asphalt shingles and has a pitch of 6 in 12 or less, then the uniform snow load on the roof will be 54 psf. 2. If the same residence has a 12 in 12 pitch roof, the snow load on the roof reduces to 44 psf. 3. If the building is a detached unheated garage with a 6 in 12 or less pitch in the same location the uniform load on the roof will be 47 psf.

I must also caution you that roof designs using rafters and mono-trusses will be subjected to substantially higher roof snow loads since they will have to be designed to support the unbalanced condition which can run up to 80 psf and more. The truss manufacturer's design programs should automatically be checking for the worst condition, either uniform loading or unbalanced loading and the truss should be built to support either condition.

I have developed a spread sheet for the computer that allows me to determine the required snow loads very quickly. If you have any questions about a particular job, please give me a call and I can probably tell you what loading will be required if you can tell me about your site and the building. As always, I look forward to working with you to insure your buildings do meet these new requirements.

December, 2001

I thought I would take this months column to talk about the changes in the "barrier free" or accessibility provisions of the 2000 Michigan Building Code. In past editions, Michigan has adopted many of its own provisions rather than using the national standards. Finally, we have eliminated almost all of the special, "Michigan", rules and are now referencing the national standards as much as our other state laws will allow. I will concentrate here on new multiple family residential building which many of your members do get involved with.

Section R326 of the Michigan Residential Code references the Michigan Building Code for all accessibility requirements. Multiple family dwellings and townhouses having 4 or more dwelling units in a structure are required to comply with the accessibility provisions of Chapter 11. Previously, the state had exempted buildings if they were classified as R-3. Many multiple amily buildings having more than 2 units would be classified as R-3 if they had an independent means of egress and the required fire separation. Now the only buildings classified as R-3 are detached one and two-family dwellings. Now, once there are 3 or more units in a building, it is classified as an R-2 apartment building or townhouse.

There is another distinction that has occurred in the new code. Previously you could separate each 2 dwelling units with a fire wall and create separate "buildings" and they would be exempt because they were still classified as R-3 buildings. The fire wall will still create separate buildings, but the requirements for compliance with the accessibility provisions begins with 4 or more dwelling units in a "structure". A structure is defined as, "that which is built or . . . composed of parts joined together in some definite manner. . . .". A fire wall will create separate buildings, but not separate structures. The bottom line is, once you have 4 or more dwelling units in a structure, you must comply the accessibility provisions.

What is needed to comply has also been greatly clarified. Previously, the code made reference to Type A and Type B dwelling units in accordance with CABO A117.1 and then referenced the 1992 edition of that standard. That edition of the standard did not identify Type A or Type B dwelling units. The plumbing code did give us some information about Type B units, but that was all. The new code references the 1998 edition of the ICC/ANSI A117.1 standard which has a new Chapter 10 that clearly identifies what Type A and Type B units are and how they are to be constructed.

Type A units are required in buildings having more than 20 dwelling units. At least 2% of the units in these buildings must be Type A units. If a structure has 4 dwelling units or more, each unit must be a Type B unit regardless of the classification of the building as R-2 or R-3. There are exemptions from being Type A or Type B units based upon whether the building has an elevator or not and for sites with steep slopes.

I know this sounds confusing. There is a reason for that, it is! If you are going to become involved in construction that has to comply with the accessibility requirements, it will really be necessary for you to have both the 2000 Michigan Building Code and the ICC/ANSI A117.1 standard. Both are currently available for sale at the Building Inspection Department.

November, 2001

I know you thought I had forgotten about responding to your questions that came up during the classes I gave on the Residential Code, but I haven't. I was hoping that the Residential Code Commentary would be published so I could give you more authoritative answers. Apparently it will still be some time in the future before one becomes available. So, here are my own "opinions" with input from BOCA staff in response to those questions.

1. Q - Regarding Table R404.1.1(1), footnote h is referenced for the 8' wall height with 6' of unbalanced backfill but there is not footnote h listed at the bottom of the table.

A - The footnote reference should be "g" not "h". It was an error the occurred during printing in converting numbers to letters.

2. Q - Section R502.3.1 references Table R502.3.1(1) and Section R502.3.2 references Table R502.3.1(2). Both these sections limit the dead load to no more than 10 psf. Both the tables give spans limits for dead loads of 10 psf and 20 psf. Can the spans for 20 psf be used?

A - BOCA staff indicates that technically the text would limit the use of the table columns to those indicated as 10 psf dead load and that the columns listed for 20 psf dead load are for information purposes only. Staff also thought a code change may be in order. I do not have a problem using the 20 psf columns in these tables as I do believe them to be accurate. They would only come into use when using a heavy tile or cement floor covering material

3. Q - Table R602.7.2, are the spans shown adequate for 70 psf ground snow load?

A - Technically, this table is appropriate for any snow load condition. I have trouble believing that, but there is no limitation in the code related to differing snow loads.

4. Q - Table R602.10.1, (Michigan Residential Code), under the column "type of brace" method 1 is not always mentioned. Why?

A - Method 1, a let-in 1" x 4" or approved metal strap device installed at an anger of 45 to 60 degrees from horizontal, is not an approved method of bracing where it is not included in this column of the table. It is only an acceptable method of bracing in 1 and 2 story buildings in Emmet County's seismic zone, and is not acceptable for use on the first floor of a three story building.

5. Q - Section R905.2.5.4 addressing flashing for asphalt shingles says step flashing is to be used at a vertical side wall. Is continuous flashing no longer acceptable?

A - This is correct, the continuous flashing is no longer acceptable where a roof drains down parallel to the vertical side wall above the roof. The step flashing will direct the water to the top of the shingles while continuous flashing will not, leaving the potential for water to work its way under the shingles and potentially into the residence over time. This detail had not been specifically addressed in the previous BOCA code.

6. Q - Section R905.2.5 addressing fasteners for asphalt shingles mentions a number of different types of nails with heads, but does not mention staples. Are staples no longer acceptable fasteners for asphalt shingles?

A - Staples are not mentioned as being acceptable fasteners for asphalt shingles, but if it can be shown that they are equivalent to the nails mentioned they would be acceptable. The referenced standard, ASTM F1667, would be an acceptable method of showing equivalency and that standard does address staples. I would require that the acceptable materials indicated in this section for nails should also be applied to staples to be considered equivalent.

October, 2001

Well, we finally received our order of the 2000 Michigan Residential Codes. BOCA did not anticipate the number of codes that the State of Michigan would need and did not order enough from the printer. When we placed our order with BOCA, we had requests for 73 copies so we ordered 100. By the time they finally arrived, we had sales of 106 copies. Sally has all the books that were ordered thru the LTHBA. If any of your members still need a copy of the Residential Code, please let us know so we can get it ordered for you. If any of your mechanical and plumbing contractor members need the 2000 Michigan Plumbing Code or the 2000 Michigan Mechanical Code that would be applicable to commercial work, we still have a handful of each on hand waiting for you. Should any of your members need the 2000 Michigan Building Code applicable to commercial work, we have a number of those available also.

I want to take the rest of this month's column to remind your members of the more significant changes that are now in effect with the Michigan Residential Code.

First of all, is the change in the required snow loads for Emmet County. Under the previous code, we designed roof framing for a 60 psf ground snow load, (typically 42 psf on the roof). We are now designated as as 70 psf ground snow load area, (typically 49 psf on the roof). I have spoken to the Wood Truss Council of Michigan and they area aware of this change also.

The second change relates to frost foundations for detached residential accessory buildings. Under the 1996 code, detached residential accessory buildings were not required to have frost protected footing. Under the new code, they are exempt from having frost protected footings only if they are 400 sf in area or less and 10 ft in height or less. Frost depth remains 42" below finished grade unless the soil is sand or gravel, then we will accept a 24" frost depth.

The final important change I want to remind you of is in reference to egress windows in habitable basements. There was an article in last months newsletter from MAHB about this issue that I really appreciated. Section R310.1 of the new code requires basements with habitable spaces to have an emergency escape and rescue opening. The definition of "habitable space" is a space in a building for living, sleeping, eating or cooking. I would hope you would encourage your owners to install these openings when the house is originally constructed. To do so as an alteration later will most likely be substantially more expensive.

As a final thought, I hope you all get used to using the new code books. There really is a lot more useful information, diagrams and tables in this code than in the old BOCA codes. If you have trouble finding what you need, give me a call and I'll try to help you locate it.

September, 2001

I thought I would take this month's column to bring your membership up to date on some of our department's procedures that I know you have to deal with on a regular basis. I would also be very interested to hear back from your membership regarding these procedures. Let me start with how to get in touch with any of the Building Inspection Department staff. In addition to letters,

• Dick Crawford
• Sharon Wagar
• Penny Marshall
• Roger Radcliffe
• Terry Carolan
• Nick Kosan
• Glen Proctor
• George Ketchman
• Marty VanBerlo
• Bob Topolsky
• Chuck Partyka

When it comes to processing construction permit applications, we have been successful this year in processing building permit applications in a week from the time the application is received at out office. This means that a letter goes out to the applicant advising them how much the building permit fee is, and what other permits must be obtained prior to our being able to issue the building permit, (zoning, septic, well, soil erosion, drive, etc.). If work starts prior to the building permit being issued, please understand that it is at your own risk. If any of the other required permits are denied, the building permit will also be denied. We do still want to make the required footing and foundation inspections should you choose to start work prior to the building permit being issued. The sub-trade permits, (electrical, mechanical & plumbing), are being processed within 24 hours of being received. Sub-trade inspections will not be made under the following two conditions: (1) The sub-trade permit application has not been received and processed by our office, and (2) The building permit for this work has not yet been issued. I know this can cause some inconvenience, but it is the only way we have found to insure that the work does not get too far ahead of the permits.

When calling in for inspections, we would really appreciate it if you could give us the permit number so we know we are sending our inspector to the right place. We can often figure out what job you are asking us to inspect if you can give us the owner's name, but if all you know is the contractor, we don't have a clue where to go. Once in a while, we can find it with the street and address, but our computer system wasn't designed to find the job by address very efficiently.

If you could just keep a list of your jobs with their permit number in your truck it would help us to serve you more efficiently.

As a final thought, please remember to call for your final inspections when the job is completed. As is often the case, the owner has probably already moved in and we would like to make sure that it is basically safe and that a Certificate of Occupancy gets issued as soon as possible. In those cases where the owner is moved in, please set up a time with the owner, either am or pm, at least 2 days in advance of the final inspection. By giving our inspectors 2 days notice they will be able to work your time into their schedule rather than making you fit into their time schedule as is normally the case.

As always, I welcome your input into any of our department procedures and I appreciate the cooperation you continue to give our department.