WHAT’s NEW FOR 2019 PERMITTING & BEYOND?
1 ‘unable to determine scope of work’ Is showing up on many review comments this year to a number of plan makers. Not too common last year. This comment supports the PPD’s claim from last year that many of the plan applications are ‘poorly’ and ‘inadequately’ prepared. Now they have a way to support their claim by totaling up the quantity of reviews that have this comment.
Purpose is to elevate both the Completeness and Precision of all applications.
2 Another new ‘process’ rule: reviews are limited to 2 by mayoral directive. Additionally, when the 2nd set of comments are prepared as per the directive ‘ALL PROJECTS THAT CANNOT BE APPROVED AFTER THE 2ND REVIEW ARE NOW REQUIRED TO HAVE A MEETING BETWEEN THE CODE OFFICIAL(S), LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER(S) /DESIGNERS OF RECORD, OWNER, AND APPLICANT TO DISCUSS THE REMAINING COMMENTS PRIOR TO THE RESUBMITTAL OF THE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION….IF PLANS ARE RESUBMITTED PRIOR TO THE MEETING, THE PLANS WILL BE REJECTED WITHOUT REVIEW.’
The intended purpose of item 1 is to avoid this requirement.
3 NOTICE OF VIOLATION’s are on the rise!! These occur when an inspector has reason to visit a property and discovers work being performed without a permit, work not defined in an issued permit, or previously performed ‘non-permitted’ work. Owner then has 30 days to secure a permit or at least show efforts to secure a permit. Otherwise, the violation can escalate up to a civil penalty.
4. Alert!! Beginning January 2019 the HPPD is required to follow HAR 464-13 requiring licensed engineer reviews, signatures, and stamps for any work on Condos, Townhouses, & SFH’s based on the $$ value of the work. Work values above $35k & $40k trigger the need for the PE’s work as part of the plan set.
While PE’s are loaded with large jobs, some will work with me on these smaller remodel & addition jobs. Their efforts do add costs to securing permits: Or no permit will be issued. This existing [and previously unenforced] legal requirement was not announced nor explained except by way of comments issued by reviewers starting this year on applications.
5 Aside Note: Since 2018, the reviewers are taking time to look at the full history of compliance to permits previously secured or they discover none were secured for prior work. This requires a unique approach to securing a new permit for new work. Fully 60%+ of my work this year required ‘after the fact’ permitting to be included. This adds to the reviewer’s efforts and adds to the comments: And More Time Will Be Required.