Permits for Decks/Windows

[53orbigger]

I am hoping someone can explain to me whether this is normal and if it is, where is the logic.

The City requests permits for residing, windows, decks, etc., etc. and if you are building something new I can kind of see the purpose, but what if I am simply replacing exactly what is already there? If my deck needs to be replaced because the wood was neglected and I am simply going to exactly replicate what is already there what is the purpose of the permit, other than to serve as a revenue source for the City? The deck is 1' off of the ground, so safety cannot be the issue. I asked the city building inspector if I needed a permit and of course his answer was yes, so I asked if I only had to replace 1 or 2 boards if I would need a permit and his answer was no, as that was considered maintenance. I really don't understand the difference if I am simply replacing what is already there and what already required a permit to build.

Thanks

53orbigger

[traveler]

maybe replace it very s l o w l y ...one or 2 boards at a time?

Realistically, apart for the standard "they want the money" answer, I suppose the rational (right or wrong) is that every situation is a little different, and rather than splitting hairs, i.e. just how high does it need to be, how much are you replacing, etc...they just go with a blanket "it all requires a permit" answer to make it easier, for them at least. And seeing as how our tax dollars pay them, in a way it might be an OK system even though it frustrates a guy sometimes. My .02...

[walleyeseeker]

The main reason has to do with building codes. When the deck was built, whatever code was in place was applicable. Once you decide to rebuild it, you need to build it to today's code. Spanning requirements are probably different and support issues may be different. Although it looks the same when finished, it's the under structure that will be of the most concern. Also, railing requirements have changed a little over the years. And, of course, they want to be able to update your property taxes.

[53orbigger]

I would be concerned if a crappy $500 deck has any impact on my property taxes. If it did then they better start taking depreciation of everything on my property into effect, but we all know that will never happen.

[WallEYES]

Codes have changed as stated and if windows are being replaced in sleeping rooms will they comply with egress? Thats why a permit is req'd....life/safety....hummmmm...possibly

[sparkydm]

Check the city's HSOforum for code requirements for decks. Most cities don't require a permit for a deck under 30". If it's at the 30" point then it must be attached to the house and requires a permit. When you talked to the inspector, did you mention it was only 1' off the ground? Do some more checking.

[53orbigger]

I didn't mention that it was only 1' off of the ground, but I thought that if it was attached to the house, which it is, then it didn't matter how high it was.

The house is less than 15 years old and the deck is not that old, so I doubt that codes have changed that much in the last 10 years. I guess I have a problem with them arbitrarily determining what is maintenance and what is new construction. I can't see the difference between me replacing some boards on a deck and something like repainting (although I may want to take a look at that to be sure that a permit is not required). If it is a tax roll issue then me repainting the entire inside of my house will likely increase the value more than a $500 deck. If there is some safety issue involved I can kind of see their point of view, but for something cosmetic it just doesn't make any sense to me and points to the city wanting to justify having a building inspector on the payroll and to add to their coffers.

[chad austin]

The codes have indeed changed over the last 10 - 15 yrs., they are changed / updated on a regular basis.

With the logic that you are only replacing what is already there; when you replace your roof, siding, windows, ECT. you are after all only replacing what is already there as well - should a permit be required for these jobs?

Answer these questions for me:

1. If you do the work yourself, should you have to pull a permit?

2. If you were to hire a contractor, should they have to pull a permit?

I used to be sour about the whole permit issue as are some of the people on this site but after being in the industry for 15+ yrs I realize they do have a purpose; do they generate revenue for the city? Sure they do. They help pay for the city inspectors wages for the year which could end up in your property taxes if that was not the case. One thing I do agree on that I have read here is the fact that some inspectors lack the motivation to actually look at the work that was performed (pretty sad,as a head inspector for a mid-sized town makes about $100,000 a year). With that being said they usually come down harder on a contractor VS. a homeowner doing their own work - in some cases

I've said it before on here, but when it comes down to it, the permit is an insurance plan for yourself, if and when you sell your home.

[SFC]

A standard has to be met. A permit makes sure those standards are met, for your safety and to ensure proper instalation of whatever product. I know u say u are doing this yourself, but what if their were no building permits required and no one to hold contractors or home owners to standard? Some insp. are very good and some not, just like in any proffesion. So being some are not people need to really check out the contractor they are hiring and learn a little bit about the job being done.

[DuckDog]

Remember also that some insurance companies (most) will not replace your work in case of a disaster if you did the work without a permit.

[3andadog]

The main reason, as stated , is building codes and life saftey codes. A lot of do it yourself projects turn into horrbile nightmares down the road due to the fact the builder or homeowner had no clue what was going on. Just watch Holmes on Homes and you'll see.

Another trend in that is begining to become widespread is that the insurance angencys will not payoff on, say a fire in an area where work was done and no permit pulled. Who's protecting their investment? The codes are there for a reason - something went wrong before. You might even lose a sale on the building if the prospective buyer finds out there was work done with no oversite.