Replacement window permitting

[NH09]

I was wondering how many of you out there are permitting replacement windows (tilt-in and full replacement). We started on 4/1/10 when New Hampshire adopted the IECC and have had a lot of resistance from both homeowners and contractors. This is currently our process:

1.) Applicant fills out building permit application and submits window specs

2.) Inspector confirms windows comply with U factor requirements, SHGC not required in Zone 5.

3.) Permit is issued and the minimum permit fee is assessed ($35.00)

4.) Final walk through inspection to confirm windows are installed.

I would like to streamline the process by eliminating the final inspection - but I don't know if that is allowed by code. Any thoughts out there?

 

[Mule]

We follow the same steps except we charge a fee based on the cost of the job. We do a final inspection to verify the company installed the windows they said they were going to install and verify the proper installation. We require the window stickers to be left on the window until we give a final inspection.

 

[fatboy]

We don't require permits for like size window replacements.

I find it a bit ironic to require compliance with the IECC for window replacement, when there may be little to no insulation in the walls and attic in 100 year old houses...... JMHO

 

[NH09]

No argument here fatboy, we have a lot of 100 year old+ houses here in town where the windows will make no difference. However, the IECC states:

402.3.6 Replacement fenestration. Where some or all of an existing fenestration unit is replaced with a new fenestration product, including sash and glazing, the replacement fenestration unit shall meet the applicable requirements for U-factor and SHGC in table 402.1.1.

Permitting these windows in something new here in NH, however just over the border in Massachusetts they have been doing it for at least 10 years now. If anyone is on the forum from Mass I would be interested in hearing how you handle replacement window permits -

 

[rktect 1]

Watch for EERO. Tilt in units going into 5.7 sq. ft. openings will no longer meet EERO.

 

[Mule]

Not necessarily...the grade floor openings can be 5 sq feet.

 

[NH09]

Thats actually another issue - The State Fire Marshals office governs egress in all buildings, and they state that when replacing egress windows with the tilt in type the opening shall not be sustantially reduced. It would be easier if a measurement was attached to that, but I have been going by no more than 3/4" on each side. (for egress windows only)

 

[rktect 1]

Thats actually another issue - The State Fire Marshals office governs egress in all buildings, and they state that when replacing egress windows with the tilt in type the opening shall not be sustantially reduced. It would be easier if a measurement was attached to that, but I have been going by no more than 3/4" on each side. (for egress windows only)

A window with a clear opening of 34.5"x24" high nets us about 5.7 sq. ft. Reducing that by 3/4" will net us 5.15 sq. ft. plus the 24 inch height requirement will also be reduced to 22.5", if you are lucky. I had a person actually bring in a replacement double hung to prove to me he met the requirements. There are actual physical blocks at the top of the double hung preventing the bottom sash from opening fully. His total opening height, even though the sash was 24" high, was about 19" in the open position. Just a warning.

 

[FredK]

We don't require permits for like size window replacements. I find it a bit ironic to require compliance with the IECC for window replacement, when there may be little to no insulation in the walls and attic in 100 year old houses...... JMHO

We do likewise.

 

[NH09]

I agree rktect 1, not to mention the amount of older homes whose windows are not egress complaint and being made smaller by the tilt ins - it's not something I'm happy about.

 

[Yankee]

I agree rktect 1, not to mention the amount of older homes whose windows are not egress complaint and being made smaller by the tilt ins - it's not something I'm happy about.

Don't forgo the inspection. even if you are not concerned with minor diminishing of required clear opening (and I agree with rktect1) then you at least need to check to see if they put in the windows that were reviewed (for instance, they could replace a compliant casement with a double hung and that totally screws the EERO). We also require an EERO be made from a non-compliant window opening if needed (a casement replacement put into a double hung opening) and have had very very good luck with that approach to date. Still employed.

 

[steveray]

P.S.

We check here in CT (IECC and EERO) we have an amendment that allows full use of the opening if the sashes are "easily removable" whatever that means...I think it reads "without special knowledge or tools"

Plus watch for tempered glass....

 

[bgingras]

Permitting these windows in something new here in NH, however just over the border in Massachusetts they have been doing it for at least 10 years now. If anyone is on the forum from Mass I would be interested in hearing how you handle replacement window permits -

In MA each town is different but generally a base permit price plus a per window charge. Stickers remain on, inspection after installation. Rarely does anyone call in for a final, and with a license required to install windows, doors and siding, plenty of guys simply try to avoid the permits. This is possibly one of the biggest work without permit complaints in some towns.

 

[NH09]

Thanks for all your replies everybody, this is what we have decided to do:

1.) Develop "short permit" for windows, issue permit same day. Applicant must present window specs to person at counter so they verify the u-factor is less than .35

2.) On this shorter permit we will have the code sections relevant to egress windows, and put in bold "egress windows may not be made smaller than (insert relevant code info). For bedroom windows that are smaller than the required egress dimensions may not be made smaller" or something to that effect.

3.) Customer signs and pays for permit, permit automatically expires in one year. No inspections are conducted.

Once the permit form is complete, I'll post it on the forum. Yankee made the point we should not forgo inspections, while I absolutely agree, it is almost impossible to get contractors/homeowners to set up that final inspection. And thanks for your reply bgingras, in my former life I was a contractor in Mass. and depending on what town you were working in some would require a final inspection, while others would just close out the permit - I wasn't sure if anything changed. I get the impression form everyone I have spoken with that this is a tough one to regulate.

 

[KZQuixote]

Thanks for all your replies everybody, this is what we have decided to do:1.) Develop "short permit" for windows, issue permit same day. Applicant must present window specs to person at counter so they verify the u-factor is less than .35

2.) On this shorter permit we will have the code sections relevant to egress windows, and put in bold "egress windows may not be made smaller than (insert relevant code info). For bedroom windows that are smaller than the required egress dimensions may not be made smaller" or something to that effect.

3.) Customer signs and pays for permit, permit automatically expires in one year. No inspections are conducted.

Once the permit form is complete, I'll post it on the forum. Yankee made the point we should not forgo inspections, while I absolutely agree, it is almost impossible to get contractors/homeowners to set up that final inspection. And thanks for your reply bgingras, in my former life I was a contractor in Mass. and depending on what town you were working in some would require a final inspection, while others would just close out the permit - I wasn't sure if anything changed. I get the impression form everyone I have spoken with that this is a tough one to regulate.

If a permit is required and I think it should be required, I don't see how you can forgo inspecting the egress and safety glazing requirements. Could be opening the door to a never ending liability.

Bill

 

[Mule]

I agree! The permitee has to get something for their fee. Why charge a fee if you are not going to perform an inspection?

 

[Yankee]

I agree! The permitee has to get something for their fee. Why charge a fee if you are not going to perform an inspection?

I have a couple of permit types that have a minimal fee but no inspection. Recording the happenings of a property is a service also.

 

[fatboy]

Curious, what would you require a permit for, but not do an inspection on?

Seems to me that issuing a permit, collecting fees, even for merely recording the happenings on a property is tacitly implying approval.

JMHO

 

[Yankee]

Curious, what would you require a permit for, but not do an inspection on?Seems to me that issuing a permit, collecting fees, even for merely recording the happenings on a property is tacitly implying approval.

JMHO

It is an approval. It is an approval of the information on the application. If the application has nothing but the scope of work and a license number, it is an approval for that scope of work done by that license holder.

 

[TJacobs]

If you issue permits and do inspections based on convenience, you might as well not be in the business.

We permit and inspect window replacements, especially when our state adopted the IECC.

Escape issues. Flashing. Energy code compliance. Safety glazing. Lots to check. Opportunities to educate. Just sayin'...

 

[Yankee]

If you issue permits and do inspections based on convenience, you might as well not be in the business.We permit and inspect window replacements, especially when our state adopted the IECC.

Escape issues. Flashing. Energy code compliance. Safety glazing. Lots to check. Opportunities to educate. Just sayin'...

Having said that, every department has their own limitations and one has to develop the processes to fit the ability. Taking an application with a signature by the responsible party to keep in the property records is better than nothing.

 

[NH09]

I would prefer to do the inspections, but with the amount of resistance we have been getting on the replacement window permitting I'll be happy to start out by just getting people to apply for permits. We've probably issued less than 10 replacement windows this past year (all caught while installing the windows) and I've had 1 person call for a final inspection - I know all the projects are done. My only options are to chase them for an inspection or put the property in violation. Chasing them for an inspection takes up staff time, and placing the property in violation seems excessive. I am hoping that once people get used to the the idea that the "tilt-in" replacement windows require permits that we can start requiring inspections down the road.

 

[Mule]

We've encountered the same thing and I agree with you that placing the property as a violation is extensive. We run occasional reports indicating which permits are hanging out there without inspections. We usually do this during the slower times, like now.... We will go by and verify the job is complete and make a notation on the property records that the construction has been completed without the benefit of a final inspection.

 

[Daddy-0-]

No permit required here unless there is framing involved. If the window is the same size as the old window it is considered maintenance. Interesting arguments though. I can see the need for inspections. There are a lot of valid points brought up by TJ and others.