# Window Well Rescue Opening



## tbz (Feb 23, 2011)

Ok,

A few quick questions,

This project we were called in by one of our contractors that just completed a bathroom renovation for this client.

The building department wont issue a c/o for his permit, because the last project that the client had done, never had final inspections completed (7 years ago) Old contractor (out of business) not home owners fault.

The home owner asked the current contractor if he could take care of this for them, the contractor agreed.

Called us in because the generator seen in the photo was installed back in 2003, old open permit.

The window well is for a sleeping room in the basement, so rescue opening here, the inspector has asked for a guard to be installed on top the wall with a gate, the problem is for structure we have to mount the guard pretty much center on the stone paver wall.

Thus leaving us 26" to the generator and 31" to the house wall.  Normally we install a 36" wide gate, however wont swing open here.

This window well was not installed with the 36" travel distance.

Also it has a depth of 48", so I suggested that they just drop in a paver platform raising the one side up 10 inches to make a step and be only 38".

The window well does not comply, but the inspector is being cool about that since that existed when the house was first built and was not part of any of the work on the open permits.

I would ask the inspector this question but it will take a few days since he is off, so I am posing it to you all to help speed up the process.

Can the gate swing in and is there a minimum width it has to be?

You can guess why the questions since our space is limited.

Thanks in adavance


----------



## TimNY (Feb 23, 2011)

Might a solution be to install a grating with a hatch?  Seems like it would solve the problem.  Well, 2 problems.  They could use the spigot too!

Is there any service required on the side of the generator facing the home?

I don't think there is anything to prohibit the gate swinging over the ladder.. other than just being a bad idea.


----------



## JBI (Feb 23, 2011)

Narrow double gates?

Maybe one of the clear covers thaey make for shallow window wells?

A hinged grate that could be left down for servicing the equipment, but lightweight enough to push up for escape and rescue?


----------



## 88twin (Feb 23, 2011)

2009 IRC 310.4 Bars,grilles, covers and screens.

this section used often here.

of course have to meet all of sec.310.2


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Feb 24, 2011)

Like JBI suggested a double gate or even a bi-fold type gate!


----------



## Yankee (Feb 24, 2011)

slider gate, course I haven't reviewed the whole situation.

Also . . . I wouldn't hold up the CO on a bathroom permit due to a "found" previous violation that is unrealted. Not sure that is technically proper.


----------



## PORTEOUS (Feb 24, 2011)

I would also think you could not hold-up current homeowner over previous contractors mistake, have to go after previous contractor, out of buisiness or not, we just wnet thru a bunch of expired permits due to slow-down, talk about a bunch of P.O.'ed contractors after double fees, should've called them in I guess.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Feb 24, 2011)

88twin said:
			
		

> 2009 IRC 310.4 Bars,grilles, covers and screens. this section used often here.
> 
> of course have to meet all of sec.310.2


I do not like this option in the colder climates. Things tend to freeze up about 30% of the year and do not work at all.

The guard provision for mechanical equipment was not a requirement in the 03 codes.


----------



## tbz (Feb 24, 2011)

Tim, The service door does open towards the house.

As for grates that was my first direction picture below shows what we would normally make for a cover.  Aluminum, very light, sitting a top aluminum angles attached to the inside making a ledge.






The problem here is

1. The window is above the the ground level and opens outward (casement)

2. This would require the grates sit above ground level, thus adding a support issue for the front edge.

3. Then the hose bib above the window adds another hook

4. Thus directing me towards making it bench height.

5. Which adds in a whole other twist

With the double gate issue, you normally have one gate fixed and the other latches in to it.

I was just thinking of swinging outward with self closing hinges like on pool gates and no locks or latches.

But I just don't like closing off the area with guards because of the service tech.

Thanks for the input


----------



## GHRoberts (Feb 24, 2011)

I would politely indicate to the inspector that you will work with the owner to improve the window well situation, but that the inspector has no authority in the matter.

---

It is hard to tell what situations you need to work around. I would favor a cover for the well.


----------



## Yankee (Feb 24, 2011)

GHRoberts said:
			
		

> I would politely indicate to the inspector that you will work with the owner to improve the window well situation, but that the inspector has no authority in the matter.


Woah . . .  maybe THIS inspector doesn't have authority, but the Building Department (and the Building Official, which in fact might be the SAME inspector) certainly DOES have authority to require a remedy.


----------



## georgia plans exam (Feb 24, 2011)

Why is the inspector asking for a guard? Is the window well opening adjacent to a porch, balcony, ramp or raised floor surface per 2006 R312.1?

GPE


----------



## FredK (Feb 24, 2011)

Yankee said:
			
		

> Woah . . .  maybe THIS inspector doesn't have authority, but the Building Department (and the Building Official, which in fact might be the SAME inspector) certainly DOES have authority to require a remedy.


Well said Yankee.

Sooner or later we find unpermitted work.  Usually after someone buys the place.  When they come in we used to charge them a double fee but have modified that to only if it is the original owner and not a new purchaserer.


----------



## tbz (Feb 24, 2011)

Yankee,

From the information I have gathered the generator permit was pulled under NJ adopted 2000 IRC.

The final inspections were never called for or done, don't know that information as different people in the building dept now, from then I am told.

The building inspector is requesting the protection because of the service door on the generator opening up towards the window well.

31 inches to be exact till the 48" drop, however as noted above, the protection was not required under the open permit I believe.

For the life of me I can't figure why the electrician installed it so close to the window well to begin with, but it is what it is.

Fredk, all work on this home was done with permits, just no final was issued on the generator permit.  No one was looking to hide, home owner thought electrician completed the inspections.

The bathroom contractor just went on with his project and when he asked for the final sign off, this was tossed up at him, which I believe is incorrect, but it is what it is.

The bathroom contractor is doing the home owner a solid by going through the open permit with the building department to get it closed out.

Not his project, nor problem, but his project is being hijack anyway.

My assumption is that the inspector is applying 2009 IRC code requirements on a project that was done under 2000 IRC code, thus at what point does the disconnect in code start?

Or how do others handle situations like this, do they stay under the 2000 code or move it to the 2009 code.  If that is the case, since the work on the generator impacted the window well does that need to be modified because less than 36" and for that does the generator need to be moved?

I feel the inspector over stepped the requiring what was not required when the work was done, but the home owner is open to a compromise so that is what we are looking for.


----------



## Yankee (Feb 24, 2011)

In my juristiction if the permit was approved in a code year that is the code required, assuming the work was done as permitted and during the active building permit period (i.e., if the permit was pulled in 2000 but the work wasn't done until 2009, long after the permit expired, it no longer is valid).


----------



## georgia plans exam (Feb 24, 2011)

Wow! I didn't even consider that someone would install a generator with the sevice door opening that way.

However, if it is 31" from the service door to the inside edge of the window well, would it still not be in compliance with 2000 IRC M1305.1 which required 30"  of working space in front of the service door? I must be missing something here.....

GPE


----------



## FredK (Feb 24, 2011)

tbz---We would sign off on the bath permit and give the owner x-time (14days) to pull a new permit for the inspection of the generator.  It would have to meet the current code.  As usual once an inspection is done they get another 180 days to get it completed unless it's deem a safety issue.

Got to give the contractor a at-a-boy for taking on this for the homeowner.


----------



## tbz (Feb 25, 2011)

Yankee,

So I am correct in that since all the work was done under the 2000 IRC, you would inspect under that code for the closeout?  You can tell no new work was done with the generator.

I was confused why the B/O didn't flag the open permit when the bathroom permit was pulled and waited till it was done.

I have run in to that before were the B/O informs me when I pull a permit to tell the owner they still have old open permits that need to be taken care of.  Just not after all the new work was done.

George,

The paver stones present a mounting problem and require that a guard be mounted on top thus reducing the clear space from 31" to 24" once installed.  They are just 2" high paving stones stacked on top of each other not 8" high blocks, I should have noted that before.

Fredk,

Now I have a concern with your notation to current code?

The home was build like 15 to 20 years ago and the window well was done then and complied, the EERO does not comply with today's code and the generator was installed near it as noted, when you say you would require it to meet today's requirements, are you saying just add the guard or are you saying move the generator out and install the guard?

Remember adding the guard in place removes the required clearance that met code when all the work was permitted and completed, just not today's 2009 code.

Also I will note that this is on the side of the house buried behind about 12 feet deep of heavy plantings hiding the equipment in the first place, not around an open path or open space.


----------



## KZQuixote (Feb 25, 2011)

tbz said: "So I am correct in that since all the work was done under the 2000 IRC, you would inspect under that code for the closeout? You can tell no new work was done with the generator."

I don't believe it works that way. If a permit expires and a new one is issued the project must comply with the current code.

IMO

Bill


----------



## mtlogcabin (Feb 25, 2011)

R105.5 Expiration.

Every permit issued shall become invalid unless the work authorized by such permit is commenced within 180 days after its issuance, (it commenced within the 180 days) or if the work authorized by such permit is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days after the time the work is commenced.( the work was completed not suspended or abandoned) The building official is authorized to grant, in writing, one or more extensions of time, for periods not more than 180 days each. The extension shall be requested in writing and justifiable cause demonstrated.

The installation of this generator probably would only require one inspection. I would ask to see the inspectors report for the original permit. It may be a building department error as to why the permit wasn't completed in the file. A new permit is not required if the work was completed within the allotted time frame. I agree it should be installed in accordance with the code the original permit was pulled. Requireing a new permit requires compliance with the current adopted code.

How about a retractable gate on the house that a worker servicing the generator could pull out to prevent him from falling off the edge


----------



## GHRoberts (Feb 25, 2011)

Yankee said:
			
		

> Woah . . .  maybe THIS inspector doesn't have authority, but the Building Department (and the Building Official, which in fact might be the SAME inspector) certainly DOES have authority to require a remedy.


Something about 180 days for the permit to expire and then time for the statute of limitations to run seems to indicate that whatever authority was had is long gone.


----------



## Yankee (Feb 25, 2011)

I would inspect the generation to the code it was installed under (assuming it had a valid permit at that time) . . . I am not clear on whether a guard was required back then and not built, or not required back then but required now?

KZQ, it is the scope of the project that must comply with the current code, not everything in the building. So a bathroom renovation permit and CO cannot hold up a non-compliance on another unrelated historic matter.

I'm not up on this , , why is a guard and gate being required?


----------



## KZQuixote (Feb 25, 2011)

Yankee said:
			
		

> I would inspect the generation to the code it was installed under (assuming it had a valid permit at that time) . . . I am not clear on whether a guard was required back then and not built, or not required back then but required now?KZQ, it is the scope of the project that must comply with the current code, not everything in the building. So a bathroom renovation permit and CO cannot hold up a non-compliance on another unrelated historic matter.
> 
> I'm not up on this , , why is a guard and gate being required?


Hi Yankee,

I was responding to tbz's comment: "So I am correct in that since all the work was done under the 2000 IRC, you would inspect under that code for the closeout? You can tell no new work was done with the generator."

My understanding of the process is: an owner allows a permit to expire then procures another permit to complete the project. The work required to complete and the approvals needed will be based on the current code not the code under which the expired permit was issued.

Is that not correct?

I'm aware that it's only the scope of the projects in this discussion that are to be considered and not the whole structure.

My first reaction to tbz's posting was how can an building official link two permits together? As in refuse to inspect the current project based on the lack of a final on an older project. But now I see R310.3 "...and finds no violations of this code or other laws that are enforced by the department of building safety..."

Which to me says the inspector can decide that the lack of the previous final constitutes a violation of a law enforced by the department and therefore refuse the CO for the current bathroom project.

Bill


----------



## mtlogcabin (Feb 25, 2011)

If the work was completed under the original permit and only the final inspection was not called for why is a new permit needed. Do the inspection, complete the paperwork and be done with it or issue the correction notice charge a 25% re activation fee and have the owner complete project as originally permitted.

It is called customer service and good public relations

Holding up the final on the current permit due to an outstanding 2003 permit would not stand up in any court.


----------



## FredK (Feb 25, 2011)

1. First of all I wouldn't hold up the bath remodel.

2. Generator needs a current permit and inspected to current code.  How do I know when it was installed?  It's not my responsibility to track down issued permit with no inspections/finals not done.

3. Age of the home has no standing in either issue.


----------



## georgia plans exam (Feb 25, 2011)

Yankee,

A guard and a gate are *NOT* required by any code section I have found.

GPE


----------



## mtlogcabin (Feb 25, 2011)

> 2. Generator needs a current permit and inspected to current code. How do I know when it was installed? It's not my responsibility to track down issued permit with no inspections/finals not done.





> the generator seen in the photo was installed back in 2003, old open permit


There was a permit for the generator. It would not be difficult for the owner to prove when it was installed and thus give the BD a reason to use the original permit for the required code.


----------



## permitguy (Feb 25, 2011)

No guard required, IMO.  The service personnel will be thankful they can stand in the window well and save their backs.


----------



## tbz (Feb 26, 2011)

KZ,

The old permit has nothing to do with the new permit.  Just that the old permit was never closed out, IE: no final inspection or other, not sure.

Holding one c/o over another one, well it is what it is you all know how the game works.

Fredk,

You have me wondering, how can you say not your responsibility to track down the old permit,



> 2. Generator needs a current permit and inspected to current code. How do I know when it was installed? It's not my responsibility to track down issued permit with no inspections/finals not done.


The old permit in your hand, it is not a check box on a screen, the issue was brought up by you, you are the one holding the open permit over the homeowners head?

Is it to hard to read the file that has brought this unclosed permit up?

Proving it was done under the time frame is real easy, homeowner has contract from old contractor, payment records, the manufacture date is printed right on the units plating and the general facts of how old the installation looks.

As to taking such a hard line with the generator, remember 1 thing that I have not mentioned yet, the electrical inspector cleared it on the older permit at this time,

To keep the post on point with my first question, the home owner is open to certain things, however

I was just asking about reverse swing, bi-parting gates and closing the distance to about 24" from the 30 minimum required for servicing.

The fact that the old permit did not require the protection be there was helpful.


----------



## Yankee (Feb 26, 2011)

I was getting confused, but I think your post has cleared it up for me -- generator under an old permit, work competed in that time frame but no final inspection -- close it out with an inspection to the code under which it was permitted, do not hold up the bathroom CO.

Adding a fence w/gates that reduces the working area below that required under today's code turns a compliant situation into a non-compliant situation and cannot be permitted.

Having said that, in the best of circumstances, it would be preferable to provide the minimum 30" clear working space without falling off the wall if it is technically possible, but it isn't a code issue in my mind.


----------



## peach (Feb 26, 2011)

All depends on the jursidiction... I see open permits for projects we finished 2 years ago.  Can't tell by the photo where the service side of the generator is.. as for the window well, it doesn't look like a casement.. install a ladder and call it good.

SOME building departments want a 36" guard around all window wells, which means a ladder, etc.  Dealing with really old stuff... do the best you can.. OR make the homeowner spend ALOT of money.. your choice


----------



## Daddy-0- (Feb 26, 2011)

It is the departments fault for letting the permit drag out that long without finals. When our permits are five months old they go on an inspector's "to do" list. They inform the permit holder that the permit will expire on thus and such a date and remind them weekly until inspections are called in. If the permit expires we send a Notice of Violation for failure to obtain the minimum required inspections and then we go to court if the permit is not reinstated. There is no excuse for a permit from the 2000 code cycle to still be hanging around.


----------

