HB1652

I oppose HB 1652 as proposed. This proposal is finding a "half baked" solution of a non-existent problem........ Minor Home Improvement definition is flawed. Should be based on the activity/scope of the “improvement” not a monetary value and who is assigning the $ value? A new addition (increased footprint) may need zoning ordinance compliance, possibly a variance due to setback requirements on the lot. Currently under the provisions of the Building Code, the Building Official shall review and issue a permit within reasonable time. Likewise the Building Official shall notify of deficiencies within a reasonable time. Refer to Chapters 1 of the IRC (residential) and IBC (commercial) codes. The proposed 2 day limit is not practical for municipalities with a part time Building Official or when one may be on a week vacation. Certificates of Occupancy may be more complex with other municipal agencies involved and to issue by default of a time limit expiration, is reckless. What if there are unresolved “failed” inspection issues and not ready for a Certificate of Occupancy? The proposed 2 day limit is not practical for municipalities with a part time Building Official or when one may be on a week vacation. I cautiously approve of third party plan review (issuance of permit) and issuance of Certificates of Occupancy, but again with reasonable time allowance requirements.