# My permit is stuck in hell!



## DaVinciRemodel (Oct 7, 2009)

I’ve submitted plans to the building department for a bath remodel. The project entails remodeling a bathroom that is a room with a sink and a connected toilet/shower room (separated by a door) into a room with a sink and a connected room (separated by a door) with a toilet/urinal (I’m replacing the shower with a urinal). My design calls for a chandelier in the room with the sink (I have 9’ ceilings). 

On Friday I noticed that my permit (applied for 3 weeks ago) is stuck in plan review (I can track progress online). So I call “what’s the hold-up”. I’m told by the plan reviewer that she does not like the idea of a chandelier in the bathroom and she can find no allowance for it in the NEC. She’s basically saying, I can’t have a chandelier in a bathroom.

I took the approach (very calmly BTW), that I believe the NEC and for that matter the IRC would only specifically prohibit something - not “allow” for something. She indicated that she could not find anything that would prohibit a chandelier – but “she’s not sure it’s Ok!

I suggested (calmly), that we have lots of pendants in kitchens that also have sinks and we have never been questioned about them. She says this is not a kitchen, it’s a bathroom – “you can’t put a chandelier above a tub”. I agreed, that would not be permitted – however, we have no tub or shower enclosure – we have a toilet and a urinal – and the chandelier is not in this room – it’s in a room with a sink .

After several minutes on the phone, I’m basically told: “show me, in the NEC, where a chandelier is permitted in a bathroom”.

I’ve taken several hours today trying to come-up with an answer to this. I don’t know how to prove a negative. You guys have any suggestions on how to handle this?

Paul


----------



## Darwin (Apr 7, 2009)

I've never seen a chandelier in a bathroom. That is certainly different.

Instead of calling, go down there in person. I always go in person. It is so I can charm the guys and gals at the desk and get to know them and they get to know me and my face. 

I make small talk and get sh!t done. The folks down there can either make the job drag out in the permit department and cause you frustration, or they can go out of their way to help you -- and you'll be on your way. 

Sometimes they act like bunk because of their bad day, but it is about my attitude and how I will stop at nothing to get what I need to get taken care of. So I get cool with these folks -- then they let the guards down. 

If one person says no about something and I know better, I go to the next guy or gal up. I don't put them on front street -- to save them embarrassment when they are wrong. I just keep it classy.


----------



## Anti-wingnut (Mar 12, 2009)

410.10 (D) prohibits said from being within 3' horizontally or 8' vertically from a tub or shower in a bathroom. Ergo, if their dimensions exceed this minimum, then they are allowed in a bathroom.

You need to go over the head of this plan checker


----------



## AFOREMA1 (Jun 25, 2009)

DaVinciRemodel said:


> I’ve submitted plans to the building department for a bath remodel. The project entails remodeling a bathroom that is a room with a sink and a connected toilet/shower room (separated by a door) into a room with a sink and a connected room (separated by a door) with a toilet/urinal (I’m replacing the shower with a urinal). My design calls for a chandelier in the room with the sink (I have 9’ ceilings).
> 
> On Friday I noticed that my permit (applied for 3 weeks ago) is stuck in plan review (I can track progress online). So I call “what’s the hold-up”. I’m told by the plan reviewer that she does not like the idea of a chandelier in the bathroom and she can find no allowance for it in the NEC. She’s basically saying, I can’t have a chandelier in a bathroom.
> 
> ...


----------



## Kgmz (Feb 9, 2007)

AW has the correct code reference.

_410.4(D) Bathtub and Shower Areas. No parts of cord-connected luminaires (fixtures), hanging luminaires (fixtures), lighting track, pendants, or ceiling-suspended (paddle) fans shall be located within a zone measured 900 mm (3 ft) horizontally and 2.5 m (8 ft) vertically from the top of the bathtub rim or shower stall threshold. This zone is all encompassing and includes the zone directly over the tub or shower stall._


You will notice that there is not one word about sinks, so by my interpretation it should be allowed since there is only a sink in the room.


----------



## DaVinciRemodel (Oct 7, 2009)

Darwin said:


> I've never seen a chandelier in a bathroom. That is certainly different.
> 
> Instead of calling, go down there in person. I always go in person. It is so I can charm the guys and gals at the desk and get to know them and they get to know me and my face.
> 
> ...


I like the idea Darwin, but I hold about 7 licenses (different jurisdictions) and work in about 17 different jurisdictions (all within a hour of me). Not practical for my time.

I just want my freak'in permit. I'm not sure how to handle proving something isn't prohibited.


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 1, 2009)

Politely aim the people towards 90.1(C) and 90.5(B). 

Then remind them the NEC is a _permissive_ document...... if it's not addressed, it's allowed. If they want a document that contains a shopping list of everything that's allowed, they'll need a freaking warehouse the size of Manhattan.


----------



## EMINNYS (Nov 29, 2010)

I don’t know how to prove a negative. You guys have any suggestions on how to handle this?

Paul[/quote]

So let me get this straight.....Who's on first, Whats on second,...Wheres, I dont know???????

I feel like I have one of these conversations everytime I apply for a permit. :confused1::confused1::confused1:


----------



## DaVinciRemodel (Oct 7, 2009)

Anti-wingnut said:


> 410.10 (D) prohibits said from being within 3' horizontally or 8' vertically from a tub or shower in a bathroom. Ergo, if their dimensions exceed this minimum, then they are allowed in a bathroom.
> 
> You need to go over the head of this plan checker


Thanks Anti :thumbsup: I'm hoping not to have to go over her head (it's a jurisdiction I work in a lot). I found 410.10 D today also and read it and re-read it. If I go over her head, I just wanted to be right - so I put it out here. 

Thanks again:thumbsup:


----------



## Tinstaafl (Jan 6, 2008)

Few things make my blood boil more than such a situation. Maybe come up with a euphemism for "pendant" that will slide by?

I agree that you need to find a way to get another opinion. Never had to do it in building department, but once had a go-round with our boys' school when they were trying to penalize my wife and I for something _they_ did. I finally wound up walking into the office and announcing in a definitely not subdued voice that I needed to talk with someone who had some common sense. The whole office suddenly looked like a colony of prairie dogs popping up to investigate an odd sound.

Took them a while, but they did (surprisingly) manage to round up such a person, and we were able to resolve the issue.


----------



## Darwin (Apr 7, 2009)

DaVinciRemodel said:


> I like the idea Darwin, but I hold about 7 licenses (different jurisdictions) and work in about 17 different jurisdictions (all within a hour of me). Not practical for my time.
> 
> I just want my freak'in permit. I'm not sure how to handle proving something isn't prohibited.


These electrical guys on here _are good._ It seems that I would copy and paste the code reference they posted and send it to that gal down there at the permit dept. She'll buckle (hopefully).:whistling


----------



## Anti-wingnut (Mar 12, 2009)

DaVinciRemodel said:


> I don’t know how to prove a negative.


 
Sometimes you can't prove a negative. That is why they are faulty.

Prove you didn't kill Vince Foster




480sparky said:


> ......remind them the NEC is a _permissive_ document...... if it's not addressed, it's allowed. If they want a document that contains a shopping list of everything that's allowed, they'll need a freaking warehouse the size of Manhattan.


 
Exactly


----------



## DaVinciRemodel (Oct 7, 2009)

480sparky said:


> Politely aim the people towards 90.1(C) and 90.5(B).
> 
> Then remind them the NEC is a _permissive_ document...... if it's not addressed, it's allowed. If they want a document that contains a shopping list of everything that's allowed, they'll need a freaking warehouse the size of Manhattan.


Thanks 480 :thumbsup: I agree, there is no way to the NEC, IRC, UPC, etc. could possibly be written to contain "what's allowed". 

You really think Manhattan would hold that? How tall are you talking :laughing:


----------



## Darwin (Apr 7, 2009)

Tinstaafl said:


> The whole office suddenly looked like a colony of prairie dogs popping up to investigate an odd sound.


now that's funney!:laughing:


----------



## DaVinciRemodel (Oct 7, 2009)

Anti-wingnut said:


> Prove you didn't kill Vince Foster


You're assuming I didn't


----------



## 480sparky (Feb 1, 2009)

DaVinciRemodel said:


> ..............You really think Manhattan would hold that? How tall are you talking :laughing:



We're talking Manhattan here.... it's not a question of 'how tall', it's 'how deep!'


----------



## DaVinciRemodel (Oct 7, 2009)

Left a detailed voice msg. for the head building inspector yesterday at 8:30 a.m. Received call at 10:00 "Your permit is ready to pick-up..." :thumbup:


----------



## Anti-wingnut (Mar 12, 2009)

Did they back off because:
1) They're wrong and you're right?
2) They read this forum
3) They are savy to you and what happened to Vince?


----------



## tcleve4911 (Mar 26, 2006)

I was just getting ready to post my idea when you posted that you got your permit....Congrats:thumbup:

My querry to you is.....
You specified an unusual detail to a system of bureaucracy that runs on standardization.
If they wouldn't let you put in a Chandelier and it was holding up the whole permitting process, why wouldn't you just say "standard light fixture", get your permit, do your project, pass your inspections and then "upgrade to a chandelier"

I like Tin's visual of the Prairie Dogs
That's exactly what happened here.










You threw them a curve ball and they were at a loss trying to find it in writing somewhere.
They have to CTA (cover their a$$) There is no common sense in government.
I'll bet they wasted a bunch of time & taxpayers dollars on that one......

Sorry about the rant
Still congrats:thumbsup:
Now go get busy....you're way behind schedule:laughing:


----------



## DaVinciRemodel (Oct 7, 2009)

tcleve4911 said:


> I was just getting ready to post my idea when you posted that you got your permit....Congrats:thumbup:
> 
> My querry to you is.....
> You specified an unusual detail to a system of bureaucracy that runs on standardization.
> ...


Your route is one I often take and If I was in a hurry for the permit, I would have gone that route - with a slight twist...

I would have gotten the permit out as you described, but I did the inspector's basement remodel about 5 years ago (he selected us out of all the GC's he sees on a daily basis). 

He often tells me not to fight with the office - we can fix it in the field :whistling


----------



## Eric K (Nov 24, 2005)

DaVinciRemodel said:


> Your route is one I often take and If I was in a hurry for the permit, I would have gone that route - with a slight twist...
> 
> I would have gotten the permit out as you described, but I did the inspector's basement remodel about 5 years ago (he selected us out of all the GC's he sees on a daily basis).
> 
> He often tells me not to fight with the office - we can fix it in the field :whistling


I was going to suggest the same thing. Do a lil upgrade after all is said and done, Not politically correct but sometimes neccesary to get around the office workers.


----------

