Are we required to obtain permits?

[hastalavista]

Have you ever done any appraisal work or do you just teach theoretical appraisal?

I'd like that job... kinda like a theoretical physicist!
I could come up with all kinds of theories, then in 5-years, you could prove me right by your field work.
Do they give any prizes for that?

 

[Mike Kennedy]

Denis, the City might give prizes if local Appraisers covering this City can find:

8.144.050 Compliance. A. Actions contrary to Title 8 are unlawful and a public nuisance. Any building or structure set up, erected, constructed, altered, enlarged, converted, moved or maintained contrary to Title 8; or any use or occupancy of any land, building or premises established, conducted, operated or maintained contrary to Title 8 is unlawful and is hereby declared to be a public nuisance and may be summarily abated as such.
B. Compliance with provisions of Title 8. Every department and employee of the City of Dublin authorized to issue permits or licenses affecting the use or occupancy of land or of a building or structure within the City shall comply with the provisions of Title 8.
C. No issuance of permit until action taken and time for appeal expired. No permit shall be issued unless and until final action has been taken and any appeal period has expired.
D. Permit or license contrary to provisions of Title 8 is null and void. Any permit or license hereafter issued for a building, structure, use or occupancy contrary to the provisions of Title 8 shall be null and void and of no effect.
8.144.060 Violations.

A. Infraction/Misdemeanor. Notwithstanding Section 1.04.030 of the Dublin Municipal Code, any person, firm, or corporation violating or causing, or permitting to be violated, or failing to comply with any of the provisions of Title 8 shall be guilty of an infraction unless such violation is described as a misdemeanor by specific provisions of Title 8.
B. Separate offense. Each person, firm, or corporation shall be guilty of a separate offense for each day and every day during any portion of which any violation of any provision of Title 8 is committed, continued or permitted by such person, firm, or corporation, and shall be punishable accordingly.
8.144.070 Remedies.
A. Civil Remedies. The Director of Community Development shall commence appropriate action or proceedings to enforce the provisions of this Title and to abate, remove or enjoin any violation of this Title.
B. Criminal Remedies. Any person, firm or corporation guilty of an infraction under the provisions of Title 8 shall be punishable upon a first infraction of a fine of not more than $100.00, and for a second infraction within a period of one year by a fine of not more than $200.00, and for a third or any subsequent infraction within a one-year period by a fine of not more than $500.00. Any violation beyond the third infraction within a one-year period may be charged as a misdemeanor and the penalty for conviction of the same shall be subject to fine or imprisonment or both not to exceed the limits set forth in California Penal Code Section 19. Rev. Ord. 16-02 (October 2002)
C. Other Applicable Remedies. The City Manager may seek compliance with the provisions of Title 8 by pursuing any available remedy, alone or in combination, to correct the violation.
D. Cumulative. All remedies contained in Title 8 for handling violations or for enforcing the provisions of Title 8 shall be cumulative and not exclusive of any other applicable provisions of City, County or State Law.
8.144.080 Inspections.
Every property owner or applicant seeking a permit or other approval under Title 8 shall permit the City access from time to time to any premises or property to render inspections as deemed necessary to determine or ensure compliance with this Title. Upon issuance of a permit or any other approval under Title 8, the property owner or applicant shall permit the City access to the premises in order to determine continued compliance with the approved permit and/or any conditions of approval.
http://www.codepublishing.com/ca/dublin.html

 

[CANative]

Mike is still confusing the illegal acts of persons with the legal uses of land.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

Mike is still confusing the illegal acts of persons with the legal uses of land.

The ordinance posted above is not confusing in the slightest. Feel free to read it a couple of times. It does not stipulate "illegal acts of persons" but does state:

"A. Actions contrary to Title 8 are unlawful and a public nuisance. Any building or structureset up, erected, constructed, altered, enlarged, converted, moved or maintained contrary to Title 8; or any use or occupancy of any land, building or premises established, conducted, operated or maintained contrary to Title 8 is unlawfuland is hereby declared to be a public nuisance and may be summarily abated as such."
___________________________________________

Mendocino County officials aren't confused either:
CHAPTER 18.08 - CONSTRUCTION PERMITS

Sec. 18.08.010 - Construction Permits and Inspection Fees.

(A) Except as otherwise exempted by the Uniform Building Code and/or other county ordinances, no person, firm, or corporation shall erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, improve, occupy, remove, convert, or demolish any building or structure in the unincorporated area of the County or cause the same to be done without first obtaining a separate building permit for each such building or structure as required by this Title. Permits shall be issued and fees collected by the Planning and Building Services Department. The schedule of fees collected are adopted from time to time by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Mendocino.

Sec. 18.08.015 - Penalties for Violations.

(A) In addition to any other relief, the County shall recover costs of enforcing the provisions of Title 18 of the Mendocino County Code, Chapter 1.5 of Division 13 of the California Health and Safety Code and any and all ordinances, rules, regulations, and orders pertaining to its Planning and Building Services Department. Investigation fees as described in Chapter 1 of the latest Model Codes adopted by the California Building Standards Commission, and violation fees collected under this section, shall be made available to the Planning and Building Services Department for use in training and further code enforcement. The hourly fees to be imposed and recovered shall be as set forth by resolution of the Board of Supervisors.
(B) Any person, firm, or corporation doing any work without first obtaining the permit required by this Title or any of the Model Codes adopted by reference in this Title or made applicable to Mendocino County by state law shall, in addition to the permit fee normally charged for such permit, pay a violation fee as provided in this section.
(C) (1) For any construction project, other than commercial or industrial structures that do not qualify as a home occupation or cottage industry, where the owner or applicant brought the violation to the attention of the County Department of Planning and Building Services, the violation fee charged shall be equal to the amount of the permit fee normally required by the applicable Model Code or Codes.
(2) For minor construction projects such as heating appliances, water heaters, re-roofings, replacement of siding, electrical outlets, plumbing fixtures, awnings, decks, and other minor projects which typically require an "over the counter" type permit, regardless of whether the owner or applicant brought the violation to the attention of the County Department of Planning and Building Services, the violation fee charged shall be equal to the amount of the permit fee normally required by the applicable Model Code or Codes.
(D) For any construction project, other than commercial or industrial structures that do not qualify as a home occupation or cottage industry, where the Department of Planning and Building Services discovered and/or investigated the violation as a result of a complaint, that does not qualify under subdivision (C) of this section, the violation fee shall be equal to twice the amount of the permit fee normally required by the applicable Model Code or Codes.
(E) For any construction project involving a commercial or industrial structure that does not qualify as a home occupation or cottage industry, the violation fee shall be equal to three times the amount of the permit fee normally required by the applicable Model Code or Codes.
In determining which violation fee applies, (F) the actual use of the property or structure involved, and not the zoning of the property, shall be the deciding factor.

(Ord. No. 4090, Sec. 2, adopted 2002.)

Exceptions: Sec. 18.04.035 - Prior Construction.

For the purposes of this Title, any building or structure constructed prior to January 1, 1974, shall be conclusively presumed to have been lawfully constructed.​

http://library.municode.com/HTML/16484/level3/SUHITA_TIT18BURE_CH18.08COPE.html

 

[normando]

Few months ago, a developer in Palo Alto tore down an Eichler without city's permission. The city wanted the developer to keep the Eichler or modifiy it in its developement of a small plaza there. The neighbors nearby loved the Eichler style and wanted to keep it. Anyway, whether the developer did it out of ignorance or willful, the city wanted to fine the developer. The developer said they were willing to rebuild a new Eichler building but it will be interesting to see what the penalty be. If it's low then it's economical to tear down historical buildings.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

Few months ago, a developer in Palo Alto tore down an Eichler without city's permission. The city wanted the developer to keep the Eichler or modifiy it in its developement of a small plaza there. The neighbors nearby loved the Eichler style and wanted to keep it. Anyway, whether the developer did it out of ignorance or willful, the city wanted to fine the developer. The developer said they were willing to rebuild a new Eichler building but it will be interesting to see what the penalty be. If it's low then it's economical to tear down historical buildings.

the story:
http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/show_story.php?id=26869

update:
http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/show_story.php?id=28547

 

[normando]

Thanks for the article. Seem like there wasn't a monetary fine... hmm.

 

[Lee Lansford]

Thank you. Based on which Definition of Highest and Best Use?

Another example in Illinois:


...

Mike, you have to return to the details of my example for it is that which forms the basis for our discussion.

There, the market is indifferent to "permit" or "no permit" and there is no enforcement of any consequence. The market does not distinguish--as to prices--based upon whether there was a "permit" or "no permit".

Under this scenario, if the appraiser--knowing his (or her) market--will merely report and analyze data with the same status as the subject, the result is an opinion of Market Value.

 

[Fnbpos]

Mike, you have to return to the details of my example for it is that which forms the basis for our discussion.

There, the market is indifferent to "permit" or "no permit" and there is no enforcement of any consequence. The market does not distinguish--as to prices--based upon whether there was a "permit" or "no permit".

Under this scenario, if the appraiser--knowing his (or her) market--will merely report and analyze data with the same status as the subject, the result is an opinion of Market Value.

Lee is correct, report and anlyze. Mike is not answering the to the original premise made by Lee. Mike is over-analyzing, Mike is way-beyond the market; sorry, the market is not as sophisticated as Mike is making it out to be...with or without all the zoning and building code notes repeated over and over. Our markets have the same codes too.

There are 1000's upon 1000's of properties changing hands with "permit issues" more so in those very old communities. Apparantely there are those that draw an imaginary, ever-changing line as to where, what and when they will "inforce" the findings of their "sometime" permit search.

You are a data gatherer; a "reader" of the MARKET; a market analyzer and a reporter of said analysis...dont be any more than that.

 

[Tim Hicks (Texas)]

It is discussions like these that make lenders and underwriters think appraisers are the permit police. Some areas never required permits, some have different rules for permits, many have no viable way to research permits. Let the lender and title company sort it out.