# PA - you can do what you want as soon as the BCO issues a COO



## MikeC (Jan 20, 2013)

About a year ago I had to deal with a person who wanted to change a large metal garage into a smaller garage with 2 apartments in the rear.  We went back and forth multiple times over penetrations in the required fire separation.  He finally got it done to my satisfaction.  Now he is building a deck on the rear of the 2nd floor apartment.  While inspecting the deck, I happened to peek into a kitchen window for the first floor and noticed that they had installed a recessed pantry into one of the required fire separations.  I didn't go in, but I can only assume that it is backed with 1/4 plywood.  Not much I can do about this in PA because there was no permit required, but it upsets me that I had such a difficult time maintaining the envelope, just to have him breech it within a month or two after I sign off.

Okay, I'm done venting.


----------



## rogerpa (Jan 20, 2013)

Does this code section still apply?

*§ 403.86. Right of entry to inspect.*   (a) A construction code official may enter a building, structure or premises during normal business hours or at a time  agreed to by the owner or owner's agent to perform inspections under the Uniform Construction Code, to enforce Uniform  Construction Code provisions *or if there is reasonable cause to believe a condition on the building, structure or premises  violates the Uniform Construction Code or which constitutes an unsafe condition.*


----------



## rshuey (Jan 20, 2013)

Re: PA - you can do what you want as soon as the BCO issues a COO

Why is no permit required? I'm on PA and if it affects a required fire separation, a permit is most definitely required.


----------



## MikeC (Jan 21, 2013)

§ 403.1. Scope.

The Uniform Construction Code does not apply to:

(8) Alterations to residential buildings which do not make structural changes or changes to means of egress, except as required by ordinances in effect under sections 303(b)(1) or 503 of the act (35 P. S. § § 7210.303(b)(1) and 7210.503). Under this subsection, a structural change does not include a minor framing change needed to replace existing windows or doors.

§ 403.62. Permit requirements and exemptions.

© A permit is not required for the exceptions listed in § 403.1(b) (relating to scope) and the following, if the work does not violate a law or ordinance:


----------



## rshuey (Jan 22, 2013)

Re: PA - you can do what you want as soon as the BCO issues a COO

They changed s garage into a smaller garage added 2 apartments and a deck and you actually believe no structural changes happened? No deck beam? Post?  Beam in garage? Joists?


----------



## Rick18071 (Jan 22, 2013)

In PA you can re wire and install all new plumbing without a permit in a house. But you need a permit if you make structure changes.

There is no clear definition of what a structure change is. You can remove or build a interior non bearing wall but what about a gable end extior wall? As soon you drill a hole into a bearing wall stud it would be a change of structure?


----------



## MikeC (Jan 22, 2013)

rshuey - the permit for apartments has been closed for a few months.  The Certificate of Occupancy was already issued.  This work was done post permit.  The only permit open is for the deck.

Rick, you pretty much have it figured out.  FWIW, you will not find any discussion of gable end walls in the IRC or the PA UCC.  An exterior wall is a load bearing wall.  When a roof truss system is used, you will notice the webbing in the end truss transfers the load straight down to the wall below.  If you ask the manufacturer of the truss, they will tell you that bottom chord needs support.  OTher than that, you have it figured out ..... you can completely gut a house, and rebuild as long as you don't touch anything load bearing.

Not only are these things exempt from a permit, but based on 403.1 of the UCC, the code doesn't apply.  Now you are starting to see my frustration.  I have borrowed an ordiance from another municipality and made a few changes to correct this problem.  It has been sitting on the city attorney's desk for almost a year. It may get enacted by the time I retire.


----------



## rshuey (Jan 22, 2013)

That sucks. I'm lucky here, we have adopted a great maintenance code and the 09 Fire Code in its entirety.


----------



## Keystone (Jan 22, 2013)

Yes the UCC guts the requirements for renovations. Municipalities around the area are hit and miss for local ordinances amending the UCC to require permits for renovations, etc... According to L&I's website, 900+/- of the 2500+/- municipalities throughout Pa. have amendments to the UCC but those figures do not account for pre UCC ordinances which may exceed the UCC. Municipalities were not required to disclose prior ordinances, only changes to local ordinance after L&I processes have been adhered to and then enactment of the ordinance.

There are a few municipalities that wrongfully exceeded the UCC without prior ordinances, they were sent to the corner and feed with a sling shot to think about there mistakes while BCO's were also in the corner on the first offense and stripped of cert's thereafter.


----------



## jar546 (Jan 22, 2013)

Structural changes don't have to be load bearing changes.  Any change to the structure is a structural alteration.  No where does it say load bearing.  In some instances, drywall is part of the structural integrity just like roof sheathing.  Stop worrying and start acting.


----------



## MikeC (Jan 22, 2013)

I wish I could agree with you, but that is also the opinion of the PA Department of Labor & Industry.  The only way I can use that on a re-roof job (adding additional loading onto the roof structure) is because L&I will not give an opinion on this one.  Where no opinion is given from from L&I, the BCO makes the determination.


----------



## rshuey (Jan 23, 2013)

That kind of crap doesn't fly in my snowglobe. Sorry man, you afraid of being sued for saving a life?


----------



## Keystone (Jan 23, 2013)

Structural Alteration - Significant and fundamental change in the configuration or framework of a building or system, resulting in essentially a different building or system.

Structural - A term applied to those members in a structure that carry an imposed load in addition to their own weight.

Structural Altertion - Modification of the parts supporting a building.

PA UCC "Alteration." Any construction or renovation to an existing structure other than repair or addition.


----------



## MikeC (Jan 24, 2013)

It isn't about being sued.  It is about not overstepping the scope of my authority.  If I were to required a permit and tell the owner to correct this, and he challenged, he would be required to pay for an appeal hearing that he would win.  This would publicly affect my future credibility (this is a small town atmosphere) and lead to multiple others constantly questioning me.  It would make for uncomfortable working conditions with both the taxpayers and the city officials.  I don't write the codes, I only enforce them as written.  Making up and adding non-existent requirements doesn't fly in my snow-globe.


----------



## jar546 (Jan 24, 2013)

Mike, the downside of projecting a hearing outcome therefore not doing anything is that your credibility as an enforcement officer suffers.  Doing nothing is sometimes worse than potentially being wrong.  You are looked at as the soft guy who won't do anything.  Then the word spreads and no one will listen.  You may feel between a rock and a hard place but the appeals board is there for a reason.  No need to project that he will even try to appeal.


----------



## jar546 (Jan 24, 2013)

Per the I-Codes Definition

*STRUCTURE.* That which is built or constructed.  

More Definitions of the adjective in question



*STRUCTURAL.*






Of, relating to, or forming part of the structure of a building or other item.

Of or relating to the arrangement of and relations between the parts or elements of a complex whole.


----------



## rshuey (Jan 24, 2013)

MikeC said:
			
		

> About a year ago I had to deal with a person who wanted to change a large metal garage into a smaller garage with 2 apartments in the rear.  We went back and forth multiple times over penetrations in the required fire separation.  He finally got it done to my satisfaction.  Now he is building a deck on the rear of the 2nd floor apartment.  While inspecting the deck, I happened to peek into a kitchen window for the first floor and noticed that they had installed a recessed pantry into one of the required fire separations.  I didn't go in, but I can only assume that it is backed with 1/4 plywood.  Not much I can do about this in PA because there was no permit required, but it upsets me that I had such a difficult time maintaining the envelope, just to have him breech it within a month or two after I sign off.Okay, I'm done venting.


You required the separation about a year ago. he then destroyed the integrity of the aforementioned separation by recessing a pantry. you saw that with your own eyes. I guess I don't understand how something WAS required a year ago and now you don't care?

I'm honestly not being a smart@$$, but my job becomes soooo difficult because "inspectors" want to get paid to sit around and let anything go. Too many have the "I don't want to be sued"(which ya can't anyway) or the "you can't see it from my house" inspector mentality.


----------



## MikeC (Jan 24, 2013)

jar546 - based on the definition of structral provided, Dow TUFF-R insultion becomes a structural insulated panel.  The UCC goes on to say that the code doesn't apply to the minor framing required to replace an existing window or door.  As far as that goes, the door between the garage and the dwelling can be chaged to a non-compliant door or completely removed because it is not a change to the means of egress.  2009 IRC states that the means of egress from the dwelling cannot be through a garage.

rshuey - Believe me, I am not someone who sits back and lets anything go.  I issued more stop work orders in the past year than I can remember.  I have required decks and porches to be removed or approved by an engineer due to them being constructed without permits.  I have ordered a newly installed modular house vacated due to the lack of inspections and certificate of occupancy.  At the same time, I always make sure I am right first.  I don't go off half cocked.  Occasionally, I do make mistakes and I accept those, eat crow, learn, and move on.  This issue is very clear and has been argued multiple times throughout the state of PA.  There is no way around it.  Either amend the code or enforce it as written.

I understand your difficulty when other let anything pass.  I honestly believe I am the only person who actually enforces any part of any building code within a 50 mile radius.  This time last year there was not a single builder who knew that handrail ends were supposed to return into the wall, post, etc...  I have had to educate every one of these builders and I get crap for it because they are allowed to do whatever they want outside of my municipality.  I don't care about being sued.  I have been threatened with it multiple times and my answer is always the same - "do what you need to do".  The one time someone actually did this, they never warned me or threatened me, they just called a lawyer.  It went absolutely nowhere.


----------



## jar546 (Jan 25, 2013)

Mike, I understand your situation and feel for you.  I will not post any more as you know my position and opinion already.  This is what happened to a zoning officer that I work with:

A neighbor complains about a possible zoning violation that someone is operating a business out of their house against the zoning code in that R1 area.

The zoning officer checks it out but cannot see or find anything to suggest there is a business there.  The complainant brings pictures to a council meeting to show what appears to be business taking place at the residence.  The council says they will continue to look into it.

It was obvious to me since there was a phone number for the business that rang at that house that there was a business.  The zoning officer did not think he had a case because the people denied running a business and told the zoning officer he was harassing them.  he then backed off because he literally wanted total proof and was afraid he would lose in court.

Guess what happened?

Both the Borough and the Zoning Officer are being sued by the complainant for failure to act.  Like I said, let the appeals board or court decide, then you are covered.  You are acting as the judge and jury by not acting.


----------



## Rick18071 (Jan 25, 2013)

I know a inspector that "peaked" in a window where he saw contractor trucks and building supplys being delivered and got sued for invason of privacy and almost got fired. No peaking unless they have a permit here in PA!


----------



## north star (Jan 25, 2013)

*= + =*

MikeC,

Does your AHJ have legal representation?.......If so, what do

they say for you to do?

*+ = +*


----------



## MikeC (Jan 25, 2013)

That is the best question yet.  I haven't asked him, but from previous dealings with him, I can assure you that he will instruct me to forget about it and move on.  He has has never been in favor of me being more restrictive than I already am.  In a few cases he has asked me to review my thought process and back off.  On this issue, I am sure he will ask my opinion and then agree with me.

Here is a link to another AHJ list of residential permit requirements: Does Your Residential Project Require* A Permit?

I didn't come here to argue about this.  I only came here to vent about how stupid the PA code is.  At least they allow the passing of local ordinances to correct most of their mistakes.


----------



## Architect1281 (Jan 25, 2013)

Mike C - So permit or not compliance is not optional.

R105.8 Responsibility. It shall be the duty of every person

who performs work for the installation or repair of building,

structure, electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing systems, for

which this code is applicable, to comply with this code.


----------



## MikeC (Jan 25, 2013)

Thanks for the try, but obviously the UCC is written so it always applies when there is a conflict with another code.  I was going to say that they didn't adopt chapter 1 of the IRC but they did.  They didn't adopt chapter 1 of the IBC.

If you read the portion of the PA UCC that I already posted, it doesn't exempt a permit.  It actually states that the code doesn't apply.  If it was only a permit exemption, I could still address it.



> § 403.21. Uniform Construction Code.(b) .......The provisions of the Uniform Construction Code apply if there is a difference between the Uniform Construction Code and the codes or standards adopted in subsection (a).


----------

