Yeah, I will agree with you on that. But that's all part of its charm, I suppose. I know if I were seriously looking at a house I would check the permits and specifically ask the inspector to take special note of any questionable areas prior to signing anything.

Good plan.

Lol, thanks

quote:

Originally posted by Biostitute:
many unincorporated areas south of FDR were built like that.

FYI, Roosevelt Road is named after Teddy Roosevelt. not FDR.

The library? If water is infiltrating through the roof on a fairly new building to that extent you've got substandard roofing materials and/or installation not to plan. Both are code violations. But I'm not saying it is or isn't the inspectors fault. Can't without knowing the exact nature of the problem as inspections do not follow every detail of construction and are not guarantees of construction to code, though many people think that.

My neighbor had to replace his entire roof including the plywood on a fairly new house- all the houses on the block were constructed by the same builder but apparently they ran out of tar paper the day they installed his roof so they just nailed his shingles to the plywood. Roof felt installation is not a typically inspected before the shingles go on.

Bio, asking "Should GE inspectors have picked up the code violations in the GE library?" implies evidence of such and incompetence on their part. I have not read that any code violations have been found or that the village was negligent in the inspection process. To date, the language circulated has been around "substandard materials" and "poor construction", neither of which are necessarily code violations.

Wasn't it you that said up in the library thread "If there's no evidence of wrong doing on the part of the Village inspector, they're out of the picture. What they can do if work is uncovered that violates building codes, is cite the owner as the owner is the one who agreed to follow the code and provided the plans demonstrating compliance with the code." Your speculation puts them "in" the picture, and your opinion about what a code violation is just that, your opinion. If there are code violations, the specifics will come out, but to date, none have. Until then, stick to the facts please.

You took it out of context in my response to BTN's question about determining a percentage of code compliance.

I thought I was careful to explain there is no evidence one way or the other about inspectors being at fault including an example.

Substandard roofing material is a code violation. Minimum standards are established for roofing materials in the code and verified on the approved plans. Research the village's or the BOCA/ICC code if you don't believe me. It is not my opinion.

Not building to the Village approved plan is also a code violation.

Doesn't seem like there could be many other reasons for a roof on a fairly new building to leak that badly.
We shall see.

We shall. And you very well could be right. But to date, "substandard roofing materials" and "not building to the Village approved plan" has not been the issue discussed or documented.

What has been mentioned is this, in 2005, the library’s board hired consultants after years of dealing with a leaking roof. What they learned was "not only were there problems in the roof but also water was infiltrating the walls and windows and the building was improperly ventilated. As a result, the space under the roof gets hotter than it should."

If code did not require additional ventilation, and the materials used met code (regardless if they were substandard or substituted), there would be no "violation(s)."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't "substandard materials" insinuate that they don't meet the code? If not, then what are they "substandard" in comparison to?

GESM, you are not wrong, I am. I should have stuck to my initial premise here that no violations have yet been found or documented. So yes, to you and Bio, if substandard materials were used (a quality lower than that prescribed by law), a violation would have occurred. That said, other than here, I don't know of anyone saying "substandard materials" were used.

Another error I made, there is an earlier reference by Larry Stein that would supports Bio's assertion, "unintended consequences, including parts of the library being built not according to plan and some parts such as expansion joints missing entirely."

I stand corrected. Thanks.

I think these days a lot of unincorporated areas do have agreements that they will be annexed to "X" town or village, once the town's city limits approach the unannexed area. Seems I saw a news story just last week about some homes in south GE that are going to be annexed under this sort of arrangement.

In any event, if I even thought about an unincoporated area (which I wouldn't, at this point), I'd be checking and re-checking to see where it will eventually be annexed to. A lot of times it does seem like the unannexed people fight it, but I think they rarely win in the end.