Homeowner pays for County Error (Maryland)

[JB740i]

I am learning cad. I fiddled around with the numbers that you have in several posts.

I came up with this drawing. I think it is righter than wronger.

You're in BIG TROUBLE.

There lots of blame to go around. YOU and your contractor should have realized that this garage is way to big relative to the house in this district. You are wanting a commercial size garage in a residential area.

You contractor's comment that he didn't know the code is BS. Common sense should have told him that this was big for the area. You were probably showing site plans and top views of the garage. You ommitted side views.

You knew it was getting bigger. Didn't you noticed that what you wanted was huge for the neighborhood. You mentioned there was an 8 foot drop to the rear neighbor. He has to look at a almost a three story building.

Initially I had posted that you might be able to work on a compromise. You went so far beyond the boundaries of being a good neighbor and citizen that your case is not defendable.

Your campaign to make you look like the underdog persecuted by the inept government just won't cut it.

You are going to have to shorten it.

You definitely have to canvas the neighbors and see if you can get support for this size or a slightly reduced size. Right now it is so far out, my guess is that they will want it to meet the code.

BTW the county will permanently fix the problem so it never happens again. Every one will now have to submit full certified plans with all views and cross sections of buildings on the lots.

I apologize for being forceful, but, you have to realize you are not a "victim", you are a guy who wanted a big garage (WE ALL DO) and it just went horribly wrong.

But aren't you missing the fact that they had Very recently changed the code to say the accessory structure couldn't be taller than the house? I don't think it mattered the square footage just the roof height.

 

[IHI]

I haven't followed this story lately but I still think in general, if I pulled the permit, it is my job to know codes, restrictions and required permits/inspections. You may have an issue to resolve if the city make an error but you have zero issue with somebody you hired.

I want to make sure i'm understanding this right before i go off....you think that by acting as the GC, hiring subs, you can just sluff off accountability and expect them to know all the codes and such?? Generally yes, BUT as the GC OVERSEEING the job, you are the final say, and no matter what, you inherit ALL the problems too, and it's always upto you to remedy them..be it a phone call to the sub that may have missed something, or something you screweed up...the GC is the last straw, the babysitter, the father of the job, and is responsible for EVERYTHING!!!! good and bad. Tis why when you take the tests to get your contractor licsence your tested on snippets of EVERY TRADE in the industry, we are expected to know at least the basics of everybody that will be working under us so we can be a check and balance system...just how it is.

 

[rancherbill]

Sorry, but your post really rubbed me the wrong way. The guy goes through the official, legal process and the permit office screwed up when they approved the plans. Yep, he made a mistake by not having the up to date code, but that should have been caught by the reviewer. Simple as that, otherwise, why even bother reviewing the plans. BTW, he could not have gotten a permit without showing an elevation view (I know, having obtained a permit in the same locality). The permit office in our county has a very bad reputation for selective enforcement. If the OP was a well connected builder, chances are he would have no problems whatsoever. Calling him a bad neighbor and bad citizen is a little over the top, especially when based on a "wronger" drawing, considering the 3' 8" measurement he quoted was as measured by the county.

Rant mode off......

I missed the figure that it was 3' 8".

I asked for details in an earlier post. He said the garage was bigger than the house and that he had then added 4' pony wall and 4' on the top to get a walk around space in the attic. In another post he said there is an 8" foot drop off to the neighbor in the back.

Bad neighbor - you bet. If I was living in the neighborhood and somebody was building a structure that was this far out of scale for the neighborhood I would be furious. The discrepancy between the house and the garage is huge even using your figures. It is 34% larger than the house (22' 4" / 16' 8"/100). Imagine what you'd feel if you next door does a building 34% larger than their house. Think of the guy in the back that is an additional 8 feet lower.

If you want something this big, go to a district where it is to scale. Why do you think you can build one?

Why is there this height bylaw? Because there was abuse. The gov't had to legislate taste and good judgment!!! That's the purpose of this type of zoning provision that garages cannot exceed the size of the house. The enjoyment of his property should not interfere with neighborhood esthetics and others enjoyment of their property and property values.

In my opinion, the appeal will result in him having to lower the building. I don't know the legislative framework of the local gov't and the state, but, my guess is they will order it with no compensation. Mistakes happen as is the case here, but, the non-compliant structures must be fixed. There's wiggle room to allow variances. This exceed the wiggle room that the appeal board would feel comfortable allowing.

 

[logical]

I want to make sure i'm understanding this right before i go off....you think that by acting as the GC, hiring subs, you can just sluff off accountability and expect them to know all the codes and such?? Generally yes, BUT as the GC OVERSEEING the job, you are the final say, and no matter what, you inherit ALL the problems too, and it's always upto you to remedy them..be it a phone call to the sub that may have missed something, or something you screweed up...the GC is the last straw, the babysitter, the father of the job, and is responsible for EVERYTHING!!!! good and bad. Tis why when you take the tests to get your contractor licsence your tested on snippets of EVERY TRADE in the industry, we are expected to know at least the basics of everybody that will be working under us so we can be a check and balance system...just how it is.

Read it again S L O W L Y....I'm pretty sure we agree.

 

[IHI]

Read it again S L O W L Y....I'm pretty sure we agree.

sloooooowwwwwllllyyyy...was just making sure

 

[rancherbill]

But aren't you missing the fact that they had Very recently changed the code to say the accessory structure couldn't be taller than the house?

Around where I Live it you have an "old" permit it is inspected to the old standard. If you get a "new rules" permit it is inspected to those standards.

 

[JB740i]

Around where I Live it you have an "old" permit it is inspected to the old standard. If you get a "new rules" permit it is inspected to those standards.

Fair enough. But my second sentence said that the square footage dimensions don't matter if I haven't missed that in this thread. Just the height. You're trying to burn him for the overall size of the building when it's just the height that is in error.

I could see if the building was 4' onto the neighors property being a problem but it's just the height. It's not like getting too close to the sun is an issue.

 

[leon renaud]

If you loose, then file suit against the person or persons that approved the permit, as well as the town itself. Then keep pushing forward until you case makes it to the State Supreme Court. My guess is that you will win in the end. I would also keep an eye out for any city buildings that might also be in violation of the law. Keep this information in your back pocket until it is timed best to release it. Nothing like seeing a town government squirm for violating one of its own ordinances.

The US Supreme Court ruled over 15 years ago that zoning us unconstitutional!I kept a copy of a news paper clipping for many years but lost it in a move it was national news.there has got to be someone on here that knows how to research this!

 

[rancherbill]

The permit office in our county has a very bad reputation for selective enforcement. If the OP was a well connected builder, chances are he would have no problems whatsoever.

This statements gets me going for two reasons. You statement implies that -

Primarily that the gov't is fat stupid lazy unethical or ignorant

Secondly that a "well connected" builder can convince the stupid (mentioned in point one) to do whatever the builder wants. WTF is "well connected"? Is he the son of the mayor, mafia mafia member, payer of big bribes, giver of weekend trips to the Bahamas? If you think he's one of these types call the FBI.

If he's well connected because he knows the code inside and out and can point out how a project is within guidelines, then more power to him. That's what he is paid to do - bring his expertise to all areas of a project from permits to completion.


Life is not black and white. This is definitely a grey area problem. Initially in my posts I suggested strategies to build a case for a variance. I asked for numbers. We got some numbers. It's 34% taller than the bylaw allows.


I look forward to hearing what is the final result.

 

[Itzkwik]

I asked for numbers. We got some numbers. It's 34% taller than the bylaw allows.

Not that it matters, but its only 22.45% too tall. House is 16' 4" and the garage is 20'.

 

[cw_racefan]

Here's an example....Builder buys an island in the middle of a river that feeds the Chesapeake Bay. Due to his knowledge of what are referred to as critical area laws (restrictions when you're within 1000ft of water), he knows permits will be next to impossible if not impossible to obtain. So, he builds a huge house, swimming pool, pier, etc with no, none, zero permits. A couple years go by, the county finds out, and makes him remove the swimming pool, and pay some very small fine. Several questions come to mind...How did he get the power company to connect power? They wouldn't touch my heavy up without a county inspection. How did he manage to get materials there without the county knowing? My guess, they did, but looked the other way. To me this is a much more egregious and "bad citizen" situation than a garage that is 3' too tall. In the end, the homeowner here will spend much more than the builder here did, for a much smaller infraction.

Another incident. A builder is "repairing" storm damage to his waterfront. He fills in a wetlands area that existed prior to the storm to give himself a nice new beach. Result? $500 fine. Seems kinda paltry compared to what the OP is experiencing.

Another not so lucky or connected homeowner built a guest house with no permits for his mother-in-law. Not sure the final outcome, but last I heard they were trying to make him tear it down, and the situation was very similar to the house on the island, but less of a violation.

A friend is a licensed electrician. He wired his own house under construction. The county inspected, found 2 minor violations. Inspector later learned who wired the house, re-inspected everything (not just the two violations) and wrote him up for 30-40 other things. Hmmmm, they were fine first inspection but not the second? Most if not all the additional things were not safety issues, but grey areas of the code subject to interpretation.

Do I need to continue??

Like I said, no dog in this fight, but this sort of thing really ticks me off.

This statements gets me going for two reasons. You statement implies that -

Primarily that the gov't is fat stupid lazy unethical or ignorant

Secondly that a "well connected" builder can convince the stupid (mentioned in point one) to do whatever the builder wants. WTF is "well connected"? Is he the son of the mayor, mafia mafia member, payer of big bribes, giver of weekend trips to the Bahamas? If you think he's one of these types call the FBI.

If he's well connected because he knows the code inside and out and can point out how a project is within guidelines, then more power to him. That's what he is paid to do - bring his expertise to all areas of a project from permits to completion.


Life is not black and white. This is definitely a grey area problem. Initially in my posts I suggested strategies to build a case for a variance. I asked for numbers. We got some numbers. It's 34% taller than the bylaw allows.


I look forward to hearing what is the final result.

 

[rancherbill]

You see black and white. I see Balck and white and shades of grey.

Here's an example....Builder buys an island in the middle of a river that feeds the Chesapeake Bay. Due to his knowledge of what are referred to as critical area laws (restrictions when you're within 1000ft of water), he knows permits will be next to impossible if not impossible to obtain. So, he builds a huge house, swimming pool, pier, etc with no, none, zero permits. A couple years go by, the county finds out, and makes him remove the swimming pool, and pay some very small fine. Several questions come to mind...How did he get the power company to connect power? They wouldn't touch my heavy up without a county inspection. How did he manage to get materials there without the county knowing? My guess, they did, but looked the other way. To me this is a much more egregious and "bad citizen" situation than a garage that is 3' too tall. In the end, the homeowner here will spend much more than the builder here did, for a much smaller infraction.

I agree on this one. It seems black and white. The building is in a definite policy area. Constructing the building went beyond a simple error. It was a deliberate attempt to ignore the law.

He should have gotten a HUGE fine or perhaps take the house and everything else down.

Another incident. A builder is "repairing" storm damage to his waterfront. He fills in a wetlands area that existed prior to the storm to give himself a nice new beach. Result? $500 fine. Seems kinda paltry compared to what the OP is experiencing.

"Repairing" is one of those grey areas. My guess he showed that he was not destroying valuable wetlands (which is VERY BAD), but rather, making necessary repairs and changes to prevent future damage. He quote relevant code sections that allowed him to make the repairs. He was able to show his intent was noble, legal and justified (repair) even though he destroyed the wetland and thus the small fine. In the end he got what he wanted a much nicer and more valuable property.

Another not so lucky or connected homeowner built a guest house with no permits for his mother-in-law. Not sure the final outcome, but last I heard they were trying to make him tear it down, and the situation was very similar to the house on the island, but less of a violation.

Second residences are in effect subdivision of land. Unrestricted subdivision of land is not a good idea. Having a "MOTHER IN LAW" living with you is definitely not a good idea. He is probably hoping he will lose his appeal.

A friend is a licensed electrician. He wired his own house under construction. The county inspected, found 2 minor violations. Inspector later learned who wired the house, re-inspected everything (not just the two violations) and wrote him up for 30-40 other things. Hmmmm, they were fine first inspection but not the second? Most if not all the additional things were not safety issues, but grey areas of the code subject to interpretation.

Two things come to mind.

First there is the code and then there is the "intent" of the code. As an example, here you are supposed to your are supposed to have "drip loops" on wire that enters an electrical outlet from above. Water coming from above runs down wire and would run directly into the box. You are supposed to loop the wire below the box so that it enters the box from below. Water running down the wire drips off instead of running in to the box.. I think, the loops are supposed to be 6", it is not a big deal if they are 5 1/2' inches as it serves the same purpose.

Secondly, Your buddy is a licensed electrician? TWO violations on a job? Did he get his license from on of those schools that advertise on the back of matchbook covers? The first inspection was giving leeway to Joe Homeowner. He'd probably pulled the permit as homeowner as it was cheaper. Probably, when they found out that he was an electrician they inspected to the standard expected of a professional. 30-40 Violations.

To summarize there were 30-40 MISTAKES. The inspector could ignore a number of them because they were compliant with the intent, but, not the actual specs. There were TWO errors that the inspector just couldn't pass. They were so wrong.

 

[cw_racefan]

Matchbox cover, you're pretty funny...

I'll leave this discussion, it's almost as bad as dealing with our permit office!

 

[jay50]

Being your own GC for your home/shop build and the amount of hassle you will have with permits/inspectors comes down to this:

Knowing whose hand to slip the bribe money in.....to get the job approved....

 

[john56h]

Funny you mention the "B" word.....I've been an inspector for about 15 years and have never had someone offer a bribe. I was on a footing/slab inspection for a garage one time though, where the owner was surprised that he didn't have to pay a bribe. The fella had recently moved out of New York City and when I checked his work then said "okay, call us when you have it framed"....he was like "that's it, I don't have to give you any money?". To which I answered "no, you already paid for your inspections with the permit fee" and he said "oh, down in the City, nobody gets nothing approved unless they pay somebody off". I kindly said "well, we're a little behind the times up here in the country".

 

[logical]

Being your own GC for your home/shop build and the amount of hassle you will have with permits/inspectors comes down to this:

Knowing whose hand to slip the bribe money in.....to get the job approved....

Maybe some places, but it was absolutely not my experience GC'ing my entire house. Is this something you've personally experienced or just something that people like to say to sound "street"?

In fact, I've put factories in the baddest parts of bad countries and never paid a flat out bribe.

 

[IHI]

It's gotta be a northeast thing, I'm on a couple contractor forums and converse with guys from around the country...literally the only place that EVER talks about needing bribe money is the new york, new jersey area...and that is all, nobody else has ever entertained the idea...i'd tell a guy to get f..ked if they ever tried to pull that **** around here...i paid my permit fee once, why the f..k would i need to bribe a guy to do his job and sign off for rough/final...he gets his wages from the city/county budget which are paid for with our taxes and permit fees...maybe it's just accepted in that area with the mob mentality, a guy dont wanna get his knees busted for not tipping the inspector, but i just cannot fathom that s..t...fricken joke...but i guess if the police and judicial system is corupt,,who ya gonna call to make it right...prolly why jobs cost more up there, they have to figure a percentage in to bribe guys already getting paid.

 

[67 455 Bird ragtop]

I was recently talking to a neighbor who just finished a very nice 1900 sq/ft garage along with other additions/mods to the existing home. The garage was to be an "attached" garage via a breezeway. In our county if it's attached the square footage in a non issue compared to a truly detached garage. A detached garage can only be 50% of the existing square footage. His breezeway was designed in his plans to be 23 feet in length. These plans were approved by the building department. But when he showed them to his concrete subcontractor. This sub remembered a NEW code that the breezeway can only be 20' long. He went back to the board and asked for a clairification they admitted they made a mistake. He modified his plans and went forward. This is a prime example of new codes not getting caught by the people who's primary job, and get paid by our taxes, it is to check these codes. Fortunatley this was caught before it became an issue.

 

[monkeyplasm]

It's gotta be a northeast thing, I'm on a couple contractor forums and converse with guys from around the country...literally the only place that EVER talks about needing bribe money is the new york, new jersey area...and that is all, nobody else has ever entertained the idea...i'd tell a guy to get f..ked if they ever tried to pull that **** around here...i paid my permit fee once, why the f..k would i need to bribe a guy to do his job and sign off for rough/final...he gets his wages from the city/county budget which are paid for with our taxes and permit fees...maybe it's just accepted in that area with the mob mentality, a guy dont wanna get his knees busted for not tipping the inspector, but i just cannot fathom that s..t...fricken joke...but i guess if the police and judicial system is corupt,,who ya gonna call to make it right...prolly why jobs cost more up there, they have to figure a percentage in to bribe guys already getting paid.

Gosh you want a big bribe. Well, since I'm already pouring cement...

 

[ron in sc]

This sub remembered a NEW code that the breezeway can only be 20' long. He went back to the board and asked for a clairification they admitted they made a mistake.

That sounds like the kind issue that can be resolved at a Board of Zoning Appeals hearing. When something like that happens were I live the city would not be allowed to issue a permit. They will tell you that you will have to appear before the BZA and request a variance. The city makes a recommendation to the BZA and if no one objects it's often sails right thru. In the case where the owner brought it to the city's attention the city would do their best to support the variance. I've found that when your straight with them they will do everything they can to help you when you need it.

Bottom line when asking for variance get as many people as possible who live in the neighborhood to support your request; have them sign a petition. You would be suprised at what the city will do and how easy it can be to deal with when that may taxpayers support your request. If you can get all adjacent property owners and all property owners who can see your property from their's to support you request it will most probably be granted.

I've been suprised at how insignificant it is to show hardship when everyone support your request.

 

[Kevin54]

Well...today should be the day. can't wait to see how this pans out!!!

 

[nissan_crawler]

Good luck, I hope they let you continue after all this BS.

 

[Mr. Welsh]

The day has arrived? Finally...wishing you the best!

 

[rburke65]

I hope "the little guy" in all this gets a favorable result. It's hard to believe with all the rules, codes regulations, inspectors, that are in place, that this happened. Maybe TOO MUCH GOVERNMENT! Good luck.

 

[gto65goat]

Kevin 54:
nissan_crawler:
Mr_Welsh:
rburke65:

Thanks to all for your support, and I want you to know I appreciate the time you took to make known your comments and thoughts.

The bottom line...I am suppose to "hear" (snail mail) from the Appeals Panel today, with their decision enclosed.

Either way it goes I will let you folks know the result.

John

 

[67 455 Bird ragtop]

Best of luck John. We're all waiting to hear GOOD news ...

 

[cw_racefan]

John -

Here's to hoping for some good news! As you know I've been following your saga from the beginning (being a fellow AACo resident), maybe the county is finally listening??

 

[nissan_crawler]

No news

 

[Dave88LX]

Dang man, I live in Pasadena too. This is a pretty local story!

I hope it all works out for you guys.

 

[gto65goat]

67 455 Bird ragtop:
cw_racefan:
nissan_crawler:
Dave88LX:

I was anxiously waiting on the arrival of snail mail late yesterday afternoon, only to discover the letter from the Appeal Panel did not arrive.

Once I hear anything, good or bad, I will let the forum know.

What really jerks my chain, is the fact that come April 21st...it will be 8 months delay, trying to get through this issue, of applying for a Variance after the stop work order was given...going to the Variance Hearing a couple of months later...being Denied my Variance request...then having to apply for an Appeal with Anne Arundel County, Maryland Court of Appeals...a few months later...I had my hearing date...and was told by the Appeal Panel I'd have their decision within 60 days. Yesterday, April 14, 2008, was the 60th day. Talk about frustrating!!!!!

Thanks again for the support.

John

 

[Junkman]

A politicians 60 days, is working days. It doesn't include weekends, or holidays, or any days that they don't work. I had an appeal that was supposed to be decided in 30 days, and I didn't get the answer for 90 days. They did tell me that it had been approved, but sending the letter what took an additional 60 days. Never found out why it took so long to get the letter. If I were you, I would make the call and get the answer by phone.

 

[Bevis]

good luck. Been waiting to hear how it goes too.

 

[gto65goat]

Junkman:

That is good advise. Since I did not receive the Court of Appeal letter decision yesterday...day number 61...I will try calling the secretary to the Appeal Board...just to see if I can obtain an answer that way.

Bevis:

Appreciate the support.


To all of the Forum members who have been following this issue: I will advise you no matter what the outcome...but as Junkman mentioned in his post...it may take several more days...even weeks before I receive a decision.

John

 

[mike944]

I haven't been following this thread closely, so i apologize if this comment is out-of-place, but since this is day 61, and you were supposed to hear within 60 days, sometimes these things have some type of limitations on when they MUST get you a response by. If they don't respond within a specified time, sometimes you win your appeal by default, due to lack of timely response.

Not sure if this applies here, but it might make this real easy.

 

[sharpe427]

A politicians 60 days, is working days.

OH...HELL NO!

You have any idea how long it takes a politician to actually WORK 60 days? Could be our grandkids decision by then!

 

[gto65goat]

mike944: Not sure if it applies, but worth looking into.

sharpe427: Oh yeah...I have to agree with you.

To All,

I just called the Appeals Board office, and was told by the secretary, that an Extension Advisement Letter concerning the decision is in the mail.

That is all she would tell me... no matter what I tried asking her after that.

John

 

[jay50]

mike944: Not sure if it applies, but worth looking into.

sharpe427: Oh yeah...I have to agree with you.

To All,

I just called the Appeals Board office, and was told by the secretary, that an Extension Advisement Letter concerning the decision is in the mail.

That is all she would tell me... no matter what I tried asking her after that.John

Sound like it was not in your favor and she wanted to avoid you cussin her out on the phone... I hope I am wrong..

 

[67 455 Bird ragtop]

I think this is what is happening. This is from the Board of Appeals FAQ page ...

How long does it take for the Board of Appeals to make a decision on a case?
Generally, the Board does not render decisions at the hearing.
The Board of Appeals will render a written opinion within 60 days of the date of the last hearing, site visit or written closing, whichever occurs last, unless additional time becomes necessary. The Clerk to the Board of Appeals will send out written notice if additional time is needed.

This sounds like an Extenstion Notice to me ... So hang in there ...

 

[Kevin54]

I just called the Appeals Board office, and was told by the secretary, that an Extension Advisement Letter concerning the decision is in the mail.

And the suspense builds

 

[ron in sc]

This sounds like an Extenstion Notice to me ... So hang in there ...

Hopefully that is good news since it means they have not ruled against you. Maybe they are looking for a way to grant you the relief you have requested and are not inclined to turn you down. That's my take hope I'm right.