# Issuing a CO for an existing building



## Heaven (Mar 24, 2010)

Bear with me here, I have never done one of these. I just had a request to inspect and issue a CO on a very large residence. The last permit pulled on this property was a kitchen remodel in 1998. Clearly, compliance w/life safety codes can be inspected, and also any building code stuff that can actually be seen.

Is this common? If so, is there another name for it, and/or what else should I be looking for? Do I notate the CO with language about the limited inspection?


----------



## Coug Dad (Mar 24, 2010)

Re: Issuing a CO for an existing building

You will probably be seeing more of this.  Another name for this is real estate agents, lenders, and title companies covering their rear ends.  It is common to verify a CO for a house when it is sold.  Many lenders and title companies are now requiring it.  My neighboor had an additional RV garage on his site when he bought it many years ago.  When he went to sell, there was no CO for the RV garage.  The deal fell through and he had to jump through hoops to get an after the fact CO issued.


----------



## Heaven (Mar 24, 2010)

Re: Issuing a CO for an existing building

I have been seeing much more if this also but not with a property that has not had any work at all for eons. Anyway, just got a call from the lawyer, he MOST DEFINATLY DOESN"T want us to come out and actually inspect, just wants a CO, , or at the very least a letter stating that we don't require a CO for a new occupant. Geesh.


----------



## doyt (Mar 24, 2010)

Re: Issuing a CO for an existing building

It could be that they are also looking for some sort of zoning verification.  We get requests all the time for zoning verifications because most of our multifamily units in the downtown area are non conforming.  We've had people who haven't checked first buying a property that was previously used as multifamily but due to foreclosures etc. have been vacant for over a year thus loosing their nonconforming use.  Then find out that it can only be used as a single family.  They get very upset.

In Ohio, the code allows for the Building Official to issue a CO for an existing building provided:

_Upon written request from the owner of an existing residential building or structure, the residential building official shall issue a certificate of occupancy, provided there are not violations of law or orders of the residential building official pending, and it is established after inspection and investigation that the alleged occupancy of the building or structure has previously existed. This code shall not require the removal, alteration or abandonment of , or prevent the continuance of , the occupancy of a lawfully existing building or structure, unless such use is deemed to endanger public safety and welfare._

Hope this helps.


----------



## Mule (Mar 24, 2010)

Re: Issuing a CO for an existing building

When we have these types of requests we usually say something like...At the time the structure was built, our records indicate that this structure was built to the codes that were in effect at that time.


----------



## Heaven (Mar 24, 2010)

Re: Issuing a CO for an existing building



			
				Mule said:
			
		

> When we have these types of requests we usually say something like...At the time the structure was built, our records indicate that this structure was built to the codes that were in effect at that time.


I wish it were that easy but I can't write such without looking at it, especially since there was no CO issued for the last project in 1998. thanks for everyone's input -


----------



## fatboy (Mar 25, 2010)

Re: Issuing a CO for an existing building

What was the code it was built under? The 97 UBC did not require a CO for SFD's (R-3's), the only reason we issued one was for the lenders if they required it.


----------



## Mule (Mar 25, 2010)

Re: Issuing a CO for an existing building



			
				Heaven said:
			
		

> Mule said:
> 
> 
> 
> > When we have these types of requests we usually say something like...At the time the structure was built, our records indicate that this structure was built to the codes that were in effect at that time.


I wish it were that easy but I can't write such without looking at it, especially since there was no CO issued for the last project in 1998. thanks for everyone's input -

Don't you have records indicating green tags...compliance to the code? I never look at the structures. I just look at our records and indicate what the records show!


----------



## Heaven (Mar 25, 2010)

Re: Issuing a CO for an existing building

Ahh . . what's a green tag?

It is an old house, built well before codes. The kitchen remodel also was an addition of some sort in 1998. No records or plans, of course. One inspection slip of the foundation, no final inspection, no CO for the project. This is very typical of what I find when I look at a property I have not seen before. In any case, I wrote a letter stating that my jurisdiction does not require a CO for a change of ownership or change of tenancy unless there has also been a change of use (this is a single family home, although 6 family's could live here comfortably : ). As a BO I have to pick the battles and this one isn't high on the priority list, at this moment.


----------



## Heaven (Mar 25, 2010)

Re: Issuing a CO for an existing building



			
				fatboy said:
			
		

> What was the code it was built under? The 97 UBC did not require a CO for SFD's (R-3's), the only reason we issued one was for the lenders if they required it.


Ah, , intersting, thanks, I'll check that


----------

