| Author | Message | ||
     fringe Citizen Username: Fringe Post Number: 742 Registered: 5-2001 |
The recent deaths of several NYC firefighters proximately caused by an illegally constructed wall in an apartment has caused that city to consider the rational for building codes. At issue is whether such codes should be enforced proactively before an injury or death occurs or post event. In the instant case it appears that the occupant, building owner, contractor and anyone else NYC can attach to this incident are headed for a Law & Order episode. Given the alleged number of rental conversions, extended "families," students living in households headed by those not their parents, etc., currently in Maplewood, which model does/will the township follow? Will it take a few deaths to change the policy? | ||
| anon Citizen Username: Anon Post Number: 1627 Registered: 6-2002 |
Interesting. How do you "proactively" enforce these codes? As I understand the way it works is you have to get a permit to do construction and then final approval once that construction is completed. If someone does construction in his own home without a permit how will anyone know? Do we want the Town doing random searches of people's homes? | ||
| Bobkat Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 7407 Registered: 5-2001 |
I believe the TC passed an ordinance requiring the registration and inspection of multi-family dwellings a year or so ago. I don't know how this is working out. I am not aware of any public reports on this. A lot of homes here, in all parts of town I might add, have sleeping rooms in the basement, which is against code unless there is a secondary means of egress provided, which usually means an "exit" window of a certain size and with a low sill, requiring a large well on the outside. Secondary egress from attic, or third floor bedrooms if you prefer, can also be a problem because of small windows. I don't think that the registration and inspection is going to do much to solve the illegal conversion problem because I doubt if the owners are going to register these properties. There was some discussion a while ago about inspecting all dwelling units, but that didn't get very far. | ||
| Joan Supporter Username: Joancrystal Post Number: 4841 Registered: 5-2001 |
Bob: In the case of illegal apartments, the town won't know about them because they won't be registered. Anon: I seem to remember a discussion immediately after reval debating the pros and cons of having periodic inspections of people's homes, similar to the reval inspections, so that illegal rental units could be identified more readily. Given the privacy concerns,I doubt most people in Maplewood (including those opposed to illegal rental units in town)would be in favor of such a program. | ||
| Bobkat Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 7408 Registered: 5-2001 |
Joan, that is what I said!!!!  | ||
| Joan Supporter Username: Joancrystal Post Number: 4844 Registered: 5-2001 |
I know. I'm agreeing with you. | ||
| Duncan Supporter Username: Duncanrogers Post Number: 3881 Registered: 12-2001  |
It seems that this bit takes the question from being about code enforcement and turns it into being about illegal students. As to the code standards.. I know of people who have done some DIY projects and been caught and fined for work without a permit. So it happens. You can basically tell whats going on around town, the network of contract workers is fairly well plugged in and there are those that refuse to work without a permit and those that don't care. And then there are folks who actually do it yourself. In any event, when and if you go to sell your home and you have done some improving you are going to have a lot of explaining to do in order to get your COO from the town. Plus, while personal beef's between inspectors and certain electrician's, contractors, and plumbers can sometimes be played out at the homeowners expense, the codes are really there to make the building safe. IMHO, its just silly and sort of short sighted to go without proper permits. | ||
| Joan Supporter Username: Joancrystal Post Number: 4874 Registered: 5-2001 |
Duncan: A child died not too long ago in a fire in a Maplewood home. It was reported at the time that the child was in the basement when the fire broke out (at a time of night when all young children should be asleep in bed). Having your regular sleeping quarters in the basement of the typical Maplewood house is against Town ordinace, i.e. illegal, but families will set up sleeping quarters in the basement if there is insufficient space elsewhere in the house. So yes, people have already died. This is definitely a health and safety issue regardless of how it may have been presented on this thread. | ||
| Pizzaz Citizen Username: Pizzaz Post Number: 1436 Registered: 11-2001  |
To think your car is inspected every two years, what is unreasonable about a house walk-through say every other year? Duncan: Congrats, I saw your interview on Soma.com. It's nice to place a face with a name. | ||
| ffof Citizen Username: Ffof Post Number: 3307 Registered: 5-2001  |
I have nothing to hide, so I wouldn't care if there was an inspection. | ||
| Earlster Supporter Username: Earlster Post Number: 933 Registered: 8-2003  |
It's the privacy of my home, that I use on my land. I don't want an inspector snooping around an a regular basis, and I have nothing to hide. I just don't like it. A car however is something that I use on public roads, and an unsafe car can endanger others. For rental units that's a different story. I think it would be in the interest of renters that there is an inspection process that makes sure that rentals are safe on a regular basis. | ||
| Reflective Citizen Username: Reflective Post Number: 710 Registered: 3-2003 |
Earlster you are right for paragraphs 2 and 3. Re Inspectors snooping around. They won't unless a complaint, like 10 cars in your driveway, 15 people leaving at 6:30 am and arriving back later. It could be that there is a housing violation in progress. The building inspector should contact the resident and ask to walk thru. Is that too onerous? | ||
| anon Citizen Username: Anon Post Number: 1638 Registered: 6-2002 |
Earlster is on target. There is The Fourth Amendment that protects against "unreasonable searches" and requires a Search Warrant based on probable cause. On the other hand the State requires on the sale of any home that the seller obtain a certificate from the Municipality that the home is properly equipped with smoke detectors which requires an inspection by either the Fire Dept. or Building Dept. and many Towns require a Certificate of Occupancy as well which requires inspection for any code violations. On rental properties many Towns require a Cert. of Occupancy every time the unit is rented to a new tenant. Maplewood requires a Certificate of Continued Use on the sale of a property to insure that a single family house has not been converted to a two-family or a two to a three or that residential property has been converted to commercial use. | ||
| Bobkat Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 7495 Registered: 5-2001 |
My home, my castle? On a hypothetical level let's say that inspections would uncover enough illegal dweilling units to result in say a $500 per year reduction in your school taxes. How would you feel? | ||
| mtierney Citizen Username: Mtierney Post Number: 747 Registered: 3-2001 |
Bobkat, it isn't all just about the money. Not that any savings should be discounted. How many people get into illegal rentals in the first place because they are struggling to pay their taxes? Safety issues involved with illegal (and often poorly constructed) extra rooms, people sleeping in the basement, etc. etc. should be major reason for home inspections. Perhaps there would be a way to narrow a search to just illegal housing accommodations and not the pretty plants growing in the basement!  | ||
| Bobkat Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 7496 Registered: 5-2001 |
I agree, on the safety issues should be the main reason for inspections. I posted about theat before. However, sometimes money talks. You mean tomatoes and peppers and maybe some gardenias? | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 3465 Registered: 9-2001 |
"The building inspector should contact the resident and ask to walk thru. Is that too onerous?" No, not at all Reflective... Granted that my circumstances are very different from most residents, but I've also been inspected more often and more times then any other resident in town... ever. I've endured months on end of close surveillance of my property by shifts of code inspectors who were instructed to park on side streets as early as 6AM just to take down license plates of vehicles entering and leaving my property. Early one morning they even tailed me up Elmwood Avenue, until I pulled over in the middle of the street by Essex Road and stopped his car. (The inspector was quite shocked I might add.) Listen, I’m not talking about once or twice either. Mr. Mittermaier and his assistants have inspected my home from top to bottom so many times in the past, I offered to leave a key under the doormat if I couldn't be there. They checked every space from the attic to the basement, including in the closets and the cabinets. Bob has also shown up unannounced several times and one time even questioned my guests. So, if you’re wondering what’s the point, I’ll tell you. I believe the town should be able to inspect your home, especially if they have reason to suspect that something is wrong. As already stated, if there’s nothing wrong, what’s the big deal? FWIW, last month I got my annual top to bottom state fire department inspection by Lt. Nugent and his assistant. Every one of my eight fire extinguishers, fourteen smoke alarms, six carbon monoxide alarms, and my emergency exit lighting units where inspected. Each year he always seems to come up with another life saving recommendation. This year he had me lower my carbon monoxide alarms. Again, inspections are good for everyone concerned. With all the different inspections I’ve had over the years, I‘ve found without exception, the township inspectors are very professional, courteous, and informative. When you receive a copy of their inspection report, it feels as good as getting a clean bill of health after your annual medical examination...  | ||
| Reflective Citizen Username: Reflective Post Number: 722 Registered: 3-2003 |
AJC Thanks for your comments Most of the posters against inspections are concerned with the civil rights of certain people living in certain areas. They are concerned about constitutional this and constitutional that. Oh boy, are they concerned. But not about ajc's inspections -why not? Hey nitwits - the police state, the erosion of civil liberties, you seem fear so much is alive and well in Maplewood and has harassed AJC for what, so-called manufactured parking issues. That's onerous in my book. AJC states he doesn't care about these instrusive inspections. I agreee, why should anyone else, especially in the interest of home safety? | ||
| anon Citizen Username: Anon Post Number: 1641 Registered: 6-2002 |
So maybe we shouldn't have had the American Revolution? Maybe we shouldn't have a Bill of Rights? Wasn't it Justice Brandeis who said the most important Right is the Right to be left alone. Art was running a B&B, a place of public accomodation, a business. That is why he was subject to inspections. He should not have been subject to harassment, and those responsible should be called to account. But Bob is right that ones home is ones castle. The government has no business coming into my home without my permission unless they have probable cause to believe I have broken the law and have a Warrant signed by a Judge. Everyone talks about the soldiers who have sacrificed their lives to protect our freedom, but then people seem so willing to give up that freedom. And what ever happened to "get the government off the backs of the people"? | ||
| mtierney Citizen Username: Mtierney Post Number: 749 Registered: 3-2001 |
What "freedom" are you worried about, Anon? Freedom to have illegal, sub-standard apartments or sleeping arrangements in your home? Freedom to fill the schools with students who don't legally live here? Freedom to create environments which could lead to fire and death of tenants? Freedom to create situations which might result in deaths or injuries to our fire fighters? Freedom to install poor electric or plumbing, bad construction, etc. ? The list could go on and on. It's not about freedom, it's about the common good. Equating home inspections to the horrors that the Iraqui people lived under is obscene. |
