Archive for the ‘permitting’ Category

The water service problem

Sunday, April 11th, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

I got freaked out pretty badly in the open plan review meeting over the code-required water service upgrade from 1 inch to 1 ½ inch, mainly because of the additional $10k to $15k price tag.

Once I got over the initial shock, I asked the plumbing reviewer what options I would have if I didn’t want to upgrade. Asking doesn’t hurt, right? To my surprise, I was presented with the following option (I paraphrase):

“If you can get a code variance letter from the commissioner of the Department of Water Management (DWM) saying that they are OK with the existing 1 inch water service, then we will be OK with it.”

I felt much better already, even though I had no clue to what my chances were to actually get that code variance.

The next logical step was to get on the phone with the plumbing inspectors at the DWM to present my case. I explained that we have applied for a green permit, that we are rehabilitating a three unit building and that we have plans for exceptional water management with all the low flow fixtures.

I was delighted to notice that the inspector was actually willing to evaluate if the 1 inch service line would suffice for the project. He asked for the plans and product information on all fixtures, which I e-mailed him right away.

Based on this information, the plumbing inspector added up all fixtures and developed a worst-case scenario. It is basically a calculation of how many gallons per minute (gpm) are needed at peak use and whether the existing 1 inch water service can deliver that amount.

More good news! It appears that the existing 1 inch service must do the job, because I was asked to submit a formal letter in which I applied for the variance. My case was presented to the commissioner and I received the variance approval shortly thereafter.

I took the letter back into another open plan review meeting, in which I received the missing final sign-off for the plumbing. All plans and documents went back to our green permit project manager who issued the permit a couple of days later. It was time to celebrate – and we did!

The water service issue added another two week delay to the green permit process and made me jump through a few more hoops (thank God I am somewhat fit!). It also saved us $10k to $15k, which we had not included in the budget. Plus, the green permit means we had no permit fees. Not such a bad deal after all!

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Permit - open plan review

Thursday, April 8th, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

A lot of people, like me, feel somewhat inconvenienced by the building permit process and the associated bureaucracy. Some of the code requirements seem excessive and expensive. Other code requirements stand in the way of sustainable technologies. On top of it, not many people like to be told what they can and cannot do.

After our recent electrical incident, my attitude began to change. The ultimate goal for all the nagging on rules and building code regulations is to assure the public’s health, safety and welfare – to prevent life threatening incidents like we just encountered.  I am now rather grateful for that.

While our project was still in zoning, we received comments from the plan review and had a week to implement the necessary corrections. Following that week we had our first open plan review meeting – yes, I said first, because we had to return a few times.

Five building disciplines review the plans and commented:

  1. Electrical,
  2. Architectural,
  3. Ventilation,
  4. Structural, and
  5. Plumbing.

We had no comments from the electrical review. The few corrections we had regarding the architectural review passed in the first open plan review.

Ventilation was more complicated. The comments we received were easily addressed and passed, but a whole bunch of other issues cropped up during the open plan review. They mainly had to do with inconsistencies between the added third unit in the basement, the architectural plan sheets and mechanical plan sheets. We were given the chance to take care of the corrections during the meeting and finally received the ventilation sign off.

Then structural, for which we had a lot of comments and corrections. Since the porch collapse here in Chicago a few years ago, the requirements and reviews have become much more stringent.

Despite all the corrections, the open plan review did not go well. Our architect, who did the engineering for the back porch replacement, was not familiar with the new requirements and had a lot more work to do. I also needed to provide more information on the load bearing columns in the basement and the planned solar panels on the roof. We had to return a week later, made a few more corrections  and finally got the structural sign off.

We also had a lot of plumbing corrections. But it boiled down to three comments that presented major obstacles.

Our storm sewer that connects to the roof downspout runs through the building. Chicago plumbing code requires that the storm sewer is run as a separate line and only can be connected to the sanitary sewer immediately before it exits the building (Chapter 18-29-1104.2). This means that we have to add another 70 feet of cast iron soil pipe, which will cost us a buck or two.

We will have to add a pressure booster system to our incoming water main (Chapter 18-29-604.7). The city’s old water mains are mostly cast iron compared to ductile iron that is commonly used in the suburbs. Ductile iron can take much more pressure. That is why a lot of household in the burbs have a pressure reducing valve. We, on the other hand, need to boost the pressure in the building to assure adequate water supply up to the second floor – says the building code.

The real kicker was, though, that we are required to upgrade our incoming 1 inch water service to 1 ½ inch (Chapter 18-29-604.7). This carries a price tag of $10,000 to $15,000 alone. Something we had not put in our budget, and something that completely freaked me out!

Our existing 1 inch water service is a relatively new copper line with a shut-off valve and meter vault in the parkway. It should last another hundred years! Plus we have planned for all sorts of water conservation measures in the building, such as low flow fixtures.

Common sense tells me that the 1 inch water service should suffice for our three units considering all the low flow fixtures. But there are no provisions in the code that take water conservation measures into account. It looks like we are stuck with the code required upgrade and the associated price tag.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

A permit surprise

Saturday, March 27th, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

Initially we were heading with a pretty good speed toward our green permit. The advertised target is a turnaround of 30 business days or less for a green permit, which was one of the major incentives to us. The other is the partial permit fee waiver, up to $25,000.

The current rumor is that a green permit could be issued in as little as 15 business days, if there are no complications, because not as many projects are coming into the Department of Building (DOB) for review since the economy downturn. We were told that our plans would be reviewed within 10 business days.

Our zoning hitch unfortunately ground that whole process to a screeching halt. I began to worry about the delay, because I assumed that the review of our plans by the DOB was on hold until we were done with the administrative adjustment.

Let’s do the math: I now had to add the 15 business days (three weeks) that zoning required to the 10 business days (two weeks) needed for the plan review – or so I thought.

Once I had delivered the certified mail receipts to zoning and knew when to return, I contacted my project manager at the DOB for a status update.

She said: “Great, by the time you can pick up your zoning approval, we should be done with the plan review, any corrections, and may be even the open plan review meeting.”

Sigh! This was the one pleasant surprise I really needed after the recent obstacle course. I was eternally grateful that the two processes, zoning and plan review, were continuing on parallel tracks. This way, the zoning glitch won’t cause much of a delay – unless another road block pops up.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Zoning – the process

Tuesday, March 23rd, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

The zoning issue we really have to worry about is the side yard setback violation. I learned during the initial review that we can apply to have the side yard setback reduced through a process called administrative adjustment.

Pre-application

I have to submit a site plan, building elevations, floor plans and a recent survey for review. The survey can’t be older than 60 days!

Since the last permit for our property was issued in 1960, I was asked to get copies of property deeds prior to 1960 from the Cook County Recorder of Deeds. The point of this exercise was to compare if the legal property description on the deeds matches with the current survey.

Equipped with deeds from 1954 and 1953 I went back to zoning for due diligence on property description and side yard setbacks. During that same review I was asked to remove the bathroom and front door from the basement. Because our plans show the building with two units, anything that may facilitate a third unit (i.e. a garden apartment in the basement) was not permissible.

A zoning officer wrote up the subject of the administrative adjustment (called written denial), which I have to get notarized along with a number of other forms.

Formal application

I was not happy! We thought about converting the basement into a garden apartment sometime in the future. Removing the bathroom and front door seemed utterly counterproductive. That said, I did understand where zoning was coming from.

Back home, I could not get myself acquainted with the idea of giving up the bathroom and front door. Instead, I took a deep dive into the zoning code. Lo and behold, I found article 17-13-1003-BB Additional Dwelling Unit:

“In the case of building permit applications for the repair, remodeling, and/or alteration of buildings that have been in lawful existence for 50 or more years, containing not more than 6 dwelling units, sought to correct Notices of Violation cited by the Department of Buildings, or for the voluntary rehabilitation of such structures, in which there is evidence that the building has been converted, altered or used for a greater number of dwelling units than existed at the time of its construction, the Zoning Administrator is authorized to approve an administrative adjustment to make zoning certification of the increased density, not to exceed more than 1 unit above its original construction, upon review of documented evidence supporting such increase in density.”

Great, if we already have to deal with an administrative adjustment, let’s see if we can add an additional dwelling unit to it!

I went back to zoning armed with a printout of the article and was allowed to add the third dwelling unit. We updated the written denial and I paid the $250 fee for the adjustment.

Notification of adjacent neighbors and the alderman

Next, I was handed three form letters that, as in the written denial, described the zoning changes (i.e. reduction in side yard setback at the back porch and addition of a third unit). The three letters went by certified mail to our adjacent neighbors and the alderman.

I received the delivery receipts of the letters to our neighbors within a couple of days. Not so for the Alderman. It turns out that the letter was delivered after business hours. The Postal Service left a pickup notice, which sat in the Alderman’s office for days. It was only after my probing that the letter was finally picked up.

To be fair, this time at least somebody picked up the phone, responded promptly to my request, and followed up with me!

Review period

With all three delivery receipts in hand, I went back to zoning and was asked to return in 15 business days.

The rule is that our neighbors and the alderman have 10 days to indicate any objections to our administrative adjustment. The Department of Zoning and Land Use Planning (DZP) has another 10 business days to process our case upon which a final decision is made.

Well, 15 days is certainly better than 20, but still, it looked like our permitting process was dragging on far longer than I had planned.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Zoning surprise

Sunday, March 21st, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

After the permit intake meeting, I left four plan sets behind that were ready for review by the Department of Building (DOB) staff. It appeared that the review could be done in two weeks.

Our plans weren’t laying around for long. I got a phone call the next day that a preliminary review has shown that we have a couple zoning violations. If I could please pickup a plan set and survey to take it over to the Department of Zoning and Land Use Planning (DZP) for review.

Oh dear! We now have to deal with zoning? Forget about the two weeks for plan review. It looks like we have to get used to a new timeline. I saw our project schedule floating down the white ceramic bowl.

Rather than panic, I wanted to find out what these violations were about and how long it would take to fix them. I picked up my plans and stepped across the corridor to zoning. No appointments. Your name goes on a list and it’s on a first-come, first-served basis. That said, homeowners get priority - much like you are allowed to board that plane with the business class people. I hope this plane doesn’t crash!

It turns out that I only have to deal with a bumpy landing: I did not show the required parking spaces on the property, the required open rear yard space, and the enclosed back porch is not in compliance with the side yard setback requirements.

The parking and open space is easy; I just add one parking stall per unit at the alley end of the property and mark the open space in the rear yard.

zoning-01

The back porch, on the other hand, was originally an open porch–—which which, at the time it was built, did not violate the side yard setback requirement.

The problem begins with the last building permit on record for our building. It was issued in 1960. A lot of work was done on the building since, with no permits, including the enclosure of the back porch.
Even though we have nothing to do with that past work, it now becomes our responsibility. Something that we should have researched before purchasing the building!

Thinking about buying? Definitely check with the city when the last building permit was issued and what alterations have been done to the building since!

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Self-Certification, or not

Monday, March 15th, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

In an attempt to streamline and simplify the permitting process, the city of Chicago developed the Self Certification Permit Program, which went into effect on 10/29/2009.

“Self-certification simplifies and streamlines the permit review process for eligible projects by allowing qualified architects and structural engineers to self-certify that plans filed with the department [of buildings] do not contain any false information and are in compliance with the requirements of the Chicago Building Code.”

Source: Self-Certification Program Rules & Regs

In other words, self-certification is an optional program that would eliminate the need for most, if not all, plan reviews by Department of Building (DOB) staff. That is, if your project architect and engineer are registered with the city as a self-certified professional.

I would love to find and speak to a self certified professional and learn if the program really works as advertised. I am skeptical that the DOB review staff willingly transfers the plan review responsibility and the power that comes with it to outside consultants.

If your architect or engineer is not self-certified, you have to follow the same steps as we did:

Once we submitted all documents for the green permit, the project plans went for a full review by the DOB staff. The review of a green permit project should take no longer than ten business days upon which the plans are returned with comments and requests for corrections.

We have about a week to address all comments, after which we take the documents back to the DOB for an Open Plan Review meeting. Sounds fancy, but it is not. We (my design professionals and I) basically haul our plans from one cubicle to the next, from one plan examiner to another, discussing the comments and corrections.

Hopefully all corrections are resolved in those discussions. If so, the green permit is issued by the DOB.

If not, the process repeats itself until all corrections are made and the plan examiner stamps and seals the plans.

If I would do a project like this again, I would make damn sure I work with self-certified professionals.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Green Permit application

Friday, March 12th, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

It’s time again to share an episode from our permit experience!

We smoothly sailed through the Chicago Green Homes enrollment and had our documents passed on to the Department of Building (DOB) to initiate the green permit. This is where the sailing got a little bumpier – largely to our learning curve about the process.

Green Permit Menu Items

Prior to accepting our permit submittal, the DOB checked with me on the Green Permit Menu Items. The Green Permit Menu Items are a requirement by the DOB in addition to the Chicago Green Homes Program with its checklist. Our project (residential, market rate single building) requires two Menu Items. We selected Exceptional Water Management and Exceptional Bike Parking. These were safe bets, in case we have to shift other project items, such as the green roof, to ‘phase two’ because of project budget restrictions.

I referred the DOB to the corresponding plan sections to allow for verification of the Menu Items.

Submittal check list

Once assured that I met the Menu Item requirements, the DOB scheduled a “preliminary meeting [for me] to discuss items required for permit and permit process”. Sounds good!

My green permit project manager at the DOB sat me down to go over the plans and the Standard Plan Review Project Submittal Checklist. And quite a list this is!

The majority of the list is meant for the project architect to make sure the plan set information is complete. That said, there were a number of forms that I took care of:

  • The Building Permit Application, which contains information about the building, project, owner, architect and contractors. I got the building classification and building information from the architect and completed the other sections myself.
  • The Excavation Certificate, if excavation is part of the project. With the certificate, I need to provide original receipts of notification to my neighbors and the excavator’s certificate of insurance.
  • The Electrical Permit Application, which I forwarded to my electrical contractor who completed the form for me.

Another important and recent change to the checklist that I should point out is that the City now requires two original plats of survey that are no more than 60 days old. Yes, you read correctly – 60 days. I know, it once was 90 days, and this change did cost me another $300 because our plats were about 65 days old!

Intake meeting

I left the preliminary meeting with a long to-do list for me and the architect. Once we had all the forms completed and the plan documents in shape, I was invited back to the DOB for the permit intake meeting.

I showed up with four sealed and signed plan sets (three for the DOB and one for our record), the two plats of survey, and the various forms, letters, and certificate of insurance.

What’s next? The plans now go “to the floor” where they are reviewed by DOB staff across the various disciplines (architectural, structural, plumbing, electrical and ventilation). This is officially called the plan review, where the project is checked for Chicago Building Code compliance. The end result is a list of comments or request for clarifications.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Plumbing code variance

Sunday, February 28th, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

I have conflict to resolve. Following my basic environmental impact research on sewer pipes, I would prefer to use HDPE based materials. The Chicago plumbing code, on the other hand, calls for cast iron soil pipe (CISP).

What options do I have? Well, none – other than applying for a plumbing code variance on environmental grounds.

My chances? Probably very slim. I hear through the grape vine that some forces in the Department of Water Management would like to update the plumbing code so that it better reflects sustainable building technologies. Others apparently don’t want any of it. Well, I guess it doesn’t hurt asking for a variance.

I wrote up my rationales on material performance, longevity and environmental footprint, included the carbon footprint calculations and sent it off to the Department of Water Management.

The Result? My variance request was denied. So far I have not received any reasons as to why, and I don’t know if I ever will. At least I tried.

The replacement sewers that will be installed under the basement slab will now be CISP. I decided to stop worrying about it. It may not be the perfect material, but I have been assured from many sides that it should outlive us. This is somewhat reassuring. But what about the next generation? Don’t they deserve some consideration?

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Chicago Green Homes enrollment

Monday, February 8th, 2010
Written by Marcus de la fleur

Let me share a little more about our experience with the Chicago Green Homes Program and Green Permit process.

I described the Chicago Green Homes Program (CGHP) in a post last September. I explained the point system and how it is tied to a one-, two- or three-star tier and talked about the Green Permit Menu Items.

Participation in the CGHP paves the way for the Green Permit process, which saves us on permit fees and shortens the review time. In fact, participation in the CGHP is a prerequisite for a Green Permit.

Here are the steps we took to enroll in the CGHP:

1) CGHP forms and guide

The CGHP webpage was my first stop. I downloaded the various forms listed at the bottom of the page, such as the application agreement, enrollment form, checklist and CGHP guide. The forms made for good bedtime reading.

2) Registering for the Enrollment Review Session

The city requires a CGHP applicant to attend an “Enrollment Review Session.” Any first time applicant must attend an Enrollment Review Session. At the time (i.e. last summer), review sessions were offered every second week at 12:30 pm on Thursdays.

All it takes to register for the Enrollment Review Session is to complete the

  1. application agreement,
  2. enrollment form and
  3. a preliminary checklist,

and then e-mail the three documents to CGHP (the e-mail is listed on their webpage). I did not need to have design, engineering or construction plans for the project – not at this time.

3) Participating in the Enrollment Review Session

Someone at CGHP responded the same day, acknowledging the receipt of my e-mail and forwarded me the date for the next Enrollment Review Sessions.

The session itself was very straightforward and lasted for only about 1 ½ hours. The CGHP and Department of Building (DOB) staff walked us through a PowerPoint presentation that summarized the various menu items and points from the CGHP guide. The more interesting and informative part was about the enrollment, permitting and certification process.

With my name and my signature on the review session attendee list, I was formally registered with the CGHP – but not yet enrolled.

4) Project design and engineering

To take the next step, I needed to have the design and engineering for the project complete. CGHP and the DOB require a complete permitting plan set for review. Any licensed design professional working in Chicago will know what items, information and details should be included.

If you would like to read up on what information is required you can check out the Standard Plan Review – Project Submittal Checklist.

5) Updated checklist

I also have to update my checklist. The important thing here is that the updated checklist actually corresponds with the plan set. In other words, all the points from the checklist must be documented and shown on the plans, sections and details.

The updated checklist is rather different from the first one. I only went for the points absolutely necessary to get us to the two star level (above 250 points) and qualify us for the green permit. This does not mean that we have given up on other points that we originally considered.

Documenting all 440 points from the original checklist in the plans would have been complex and thus costly. We’d rather invest that money in more insulation or better windows.

6) CGHP enrollment submittal

Once the plan set and checklist are ready, I can submit them to CGHP for review. My first submittal wasn’t too successful, because I did not complete the “Applicant Comments” section on the checklist.
I learned that I should include reference notes that point the reviewer to the corresponding plan sheet or details, facilitating the review process. Makes sense, doesn’t it?

Because I had my plan set in PDF format, I was able to submit it via email, along with the checklist.

7) CGHP enrollment

CGH took one week to review my submittal, i.e. scrutinizing my checklist against the plan set. I was happy to learn that I had my ducks in a row, because I receive an e-mail confirming my enrollment in the Chicago Green Homes Program! Hurray!

The entire package (plans and checklist) was passed on to DOB to initiate the Green Permit process. And that process deserves its own blog entry. Stay tuned!

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

The Chicago Green Homes Program

Sunday, September 6th, 2009
Written by Marcus de la fleur

A lot of things are happening in preparation for the design process. We have to think and prepare for our building permit.

Chicago is interesting in that the city has developed the Chicago Green Homes program (CGH). It is a voluntary program that encourages homeowners like us to use and integrate green, sustainable and resource efficient technologies during new construction or major remodeling.

The program is very similar to LEED for Homes program (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) by the U.S. Green Building Council, but doesn’t have the registration and commissioning fees.

Look up LEED for Homes registration and commissioning fees.

CGH offers an excellent resource with its Green Homes Guide (v.2), which provides examples of sustainable practices and technologies that could be used during new construction or remodeling.

The guide organizes the examples into seven major categories (similar to LEED):

  1. Sustainable Sites
  2. Energy Efficiency
  3. Materials
  4. Health and Safety
  5. Resource Conservation
  6. Homeowner Education
  7. Innovation

Why is this of so much interest to us? Because the city has done an excellent job turning this into an incentive program for homeowners like us. Each practice or technology has a number of points assigned to it. Take windows in the energy efficiency category for instance (item 215.1). Energy efficient windows with a U-value of 0.31 or less earn us 5 points.  Windows with a U-value of 0.28 or less earn us 10 points. (U-value is a measure of heat transfer through the window. The smaller the U-value, the greater the resistance to heat transfer, the better insulated the window).

The points actually have a value to us. They can buy us a free building permit – a Green Permit – and expedite the permit process. Here is how it works:

The CGH point system is structured into three green building levels (one star, two stars and three stars). For the renovation of a residential building like ours (fewer than 10 units), we would need enough points to achieve two stars (i.e. 250), which would qualify us for a green building permit. Well – almost. We would also need to include two Green Permit Menu Items. The menu items cover areas such as exceptional energy performance, renewable energy, exceptional bike parking, to mention a few.

Meeting these requirements would expedite our permit (the published goal is 30 days, although it is not always met) and waive consultant review fees up to $25,000. A typical permit would probably cost us around $1,000 to $1,500, which is what we would save with the Green Permit.

How do we know if we meet the requirements? We have our project principles and wish list (see also 09/03/2009 post) and use this information to complete CGH Multi-Family Renovation Checklist and select the most applicable Green Permit Menu Items. The checklist is a preformatted Excel spreadsheet with all applicable items under each of the seven categories (see also above) and automatically tallies the points.

Because we haven’t tested our ideas, scrutinized our wish list, or delved into the design process yet, I assigned zero points to any item that had even the slightest question mark hanging over it – just to be safe. It turns out that we may get as many as 440 points, which gets us above the required 250 points for the green permit. On the Green Permit Menu Items, we assume that we will comply with the requirements for renewable energy, exceptional water management and exceptional bike parking.

cgh-01

I would love to provide links to the Green Permit requirements and Green Permit Menu Items, but it appears that the information on the city’s web site has not been updated yet. If you would like to get up to date information you may want to contact the Department of Buildings or the Chicago Center for Green Technology directly.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark