A year and a half ago (January 2022) I had two outdoor staircases at my home rebuilt - there was significant wood rot and they were unsafe. When I say “rebuilt”, they were entirely torn down and new ones were built. One was built exactly the way the original was done, the other with extra supports. A friend of mine is a contractor and did the work. I briefly mentioned that the city in which I live is VERY pushy about permits but we decided we would go forward and attempt to pass this off as “repair” if an inspector came a-calling.
Now, at the end of July 2023 I have received a notice of violation for, you guessed it, “Replacing or repairing a historic district home exterior stair case and walls”. I don’t know what the walls bit means, is that the railings? Anyway, the notice lists 6/29/23 as the “Date Case Established” and says that an inspection was conducted on 7/17/23. I have until 9/20/23 to comply, which would start with getting an inspection and could, I assume, spiral into having to do any work the inspector orders. Or, worst-case, be commanded to tear down the staircases for new ones. THAT would suck.
How in the world can they determine in July 2023 that I had my staircase rebuilt in 2022? Do they have pictures of the previous staircase? Do we think that the “Date Case Established” is the date that somebody ratted me out?
Also, I’m pretty sure they only know about the staircase facing the street. So however I deal with this, I definitely only want to have to deal with that one and would prefer they don’t discover the other staircase in the midst of this.
My gut is to simply comply, ask for an inspection, and hope that the stairs pass. Something tells me that fighting will make this worse, and that I’m not going to be able to get them to go away. At the root of this is the fact that they are indeed correct that I did this work without a permit, although I don’t know how they can possibly know/prove that.
Depending on the stakes involved, which I’m not really clear on, I’d strongly consider approaching an attorney with expertise in these matters for advice.
Yeah this occurred to me. The stairs (and some other minor work) cost me around $20K. So if I were ordered to tear everything out and start again it would cost at least that much, presumably plus fines or something. Definitely attorney territory.
The are programs and services that study aerial photographs and detect changes for property tax purposes. Those could also be used to detect unpermitted construction (but the benefit there is much smaller to the city, so it’s less common). Unlikely a resident complaint or code enforcer randomly noticing (although you’re lucky you didn’t get caught during the project).
Are the ones in question rebuilt exactly as the old ones were, or were they the ones with extra supports? Is the layout the same?
Did they dig footers or use existing footers? Does your deck even have footers?
Does the deck have closed risers? Are you positive banister spacing is to code? And, the hard one, tread depth/width and footer design. Go get a measuring tape and confirm it’s to code.
I would research, research, research possible outcomes and lean towards playing the “drooling idiot worried about his kid getting hurt” card as hard as I could, with a dose of hardship thrown in. I kinda don’t think a lawyer will be of much help, but I guess it couldn’t hurt.
EDIT: It’s also possible that the city’s complaint is more based on the historic aspect than the unpermitted construction aspect. Do you have any pictures of the rotting deck from before?
Layout is the same, these are indeed the ones with extra supports. Old stairs did not have footers, new stairs do.
Drooling idiot “whaaaaat I needed a permit for that?” is definitely how I’m likely to approach it and hope they don’t demand something unreasonable. I have learned there’s an appeals process, so I think it’s possible to start out as friendly idiot and switch to litigious guy if things go sideways.
Spoke to my brother-in-law who has done work around here (an architect, not a contractor) and he definitely thinks the historic neighborhood part is the real issue, and that I might have had to go before the design review board if I had sought a permit in the first place. That sounds bad to me, but he thinks this won’t be a huge deal.
I don’t think I have pictures of the previous stairs, but they are almost exactly the same from a design/appearance perspective. I think if I end up with issues it will be more about stair width or whatever than it will be about how they look.
I really want to know how they come to sending me a code violation 18 months after the work was completed, but I guess I should let it go. A neighbor two doors down has been doing some construction and I know they had some permit issues, I think it’s totally possible they said “well then how did THEY get away with it?” I don’t think the aerial photo explanation is possible, the footprint is exactly the same and I don’t think would be detectable from above. I really think somebody must’ve put in a call.
Street view could be your friend to prove the stairs look very similar to previous ones. Starting out with “I love the historic nature of this neighborhood—that’s why I live here and made every effort to preserve the exact look and layout of the stairs” should disarm them a bit. If people feel like you’re an ally to whatever their end goal is and willing to do whatever’s reasonable (pay inspection fee and reasonable fine or whatever) they’ll be a lot more likely to let it slide through than if you go into litigious mode immediately.
It’s both good and bad for you that decks are extremely standard (based on typical wood sizes and stuff). It means you’re likely to code and it’s NBD to get it inspected. But if it’s not to code for whatever reason, it’s pretty black and white.
The city will often perceive “making it look historic” as manipulating the value of the home. Homes remain classified as historic, in part, because they have original fits and finishes. I think that this is an important distinction to understand when approaching the city to talk.
For example, maybe they won’t approve a synthetic wood that looks like redwood for the stairs/deck, but they will approve natural redwood. Same goes for bricks and tiles and whatnot. They can’t be replicas, they have to be original.
As others have opined, if the inspection is for potential building/safety issues it shouldn’t really become a huge issue if the stairs were actually built to current code.
An inspection related to historical preservation could become a PITA, depending on your local codes.
The only status update I have to share is that the contractor, who is a personal friend, is freaking out. I already said I’d tell them I acted as owner/builder, but if they ask who actually did the work I’m not going to be able to claim I literally did it myself. So he’s doing some research to see the best way to have his ass covered. It’ll be several days at least before I contact the city to get the process started.
The stairs are not small, and there’s a pretty big landing at the top. In real life it is very far from realistic that I did this with a buddy, but I guess there are people in the world for whom that could be true. It took my friend and three or four guys quite a while to finish the project.
I mean, if he comes back and says “I am royally fucked unless you claim you hired laborers from Home Depot”, I’ll consider it. But in a place where I’m trying (at the outset) to make nice with the inspector, I think claiming I did this myself will be a very obvious lie that doesn’t serve me well.
Lying seems like the worst play. Could easily be a crime to do that. It’s the old adage that often the cover-up gets you in more trouble than the crime.
It’s also a lie that would be trivially easy to disprove with any investigation.
Meh, in my professional and personal world people do major projects as owner/builders all the time (about to permit my deck that exact way right now) and the city DGAF whether a contractor is actually doing the work, but I don’t work in California much and, yes, things are tough as nails there in general.
“My friend works for a builder and we did it together as a project” is not technically a lie and is not easy to disprove. I don’t see how they could possibly subpoena who built your stairway lol. That deck is not super impressive (no offense) and tons of people do upgrades that size on their own homes.
Just deflect and refuse to cough up an actual name. Act wary and uncomfortable and say “my friend from college—why is that important?” If he insists upon getting the name, you’re already screwed and there’s no goodwill to be had anyways. “I don’t really know what’s going on with this or why that’s relevant right now. Aren’t we just looking at a stairway here?” Then it’s lawyer time. And obviously don’t tell him the name.
There’s a pretty good chance the inspector will think this is all silly and below his pay grade and just wants to get you to pay an inspection fee. I’ve always marveled at how much cities seem interested in their (often minuscule) inspection fees, like that’s the entire motivation for the project in their eyes. They might well see you paying the inspection fee as the W they’re looking for.
Either way, interesting situation! Keep us posted!
Maybe it’s just me, but I do see the public interest here and I don’t think it’s just performative BS or anything. You can’t really have people building stairs willy-nilly without making sure code is followed, etc. (I assume you did it well, but across random people you can’t) If I was in the community, I definitely would want any type of structure like this inspected (especially if it’s my property)
How much did you save by not getting a permit? I have done a shit load of unlicensed, unpermitted work in my house (windows, doors, bathrooms, fence) and have been paranoid that it could be an issue someday.
