• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Requirements to start remodeling and pass the inspection

ArmanBeh

REGISTERED
Joined
Nov 14, 2024
Messages
1
Location
Los Angeles California
Hi everyone,

I want to purchase a property in Los Angeles to remodel and flip. I have recently moved to California and am not familiar with the regulations here. I want to find a property which has good layout and does not require extensive floor plan changes. What I have found out is that if there is a requirement for plan approval then the permit will take more than a couple of months to be approved otherwise it will be quicker. I don't want to go the route which requires plan approval and takes more time. How do I know it before buying the property? A good property for sale will be competitive and there is no time for going to the city and asking for their help.

1- replacing all the cabinets and opening up the kitchen to the living room. if the wall to be removed is not load bearing.

2- bedroom and kitchen share walls. switch the place of kitchen with the bedroom.

Which one of the above requires plan approval which takes long, and which one can be done with an express permit?
 
Sounds like you want to do work that is exempt from permit. Keep in mind that if you buy a house to flip it, you cannot get an owner-builder permit. If you get an owner-builder permit, you'll be signing a clause that says you won't sell it within one year of completion of the permit. Unless, of course, you have a contractor's license.

2022 California Residential Code
SECTION R105
PERMITS
R105.1 Required. Any owner or owner's authorized agent
who intends to construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish
or change the occupancy of a building or structure, or to
erect, install, enlarge, alter, repair, remove, convert or replace
any electrical, gas, mechanical or plumbing system, the
installation of which is regulated by this code, or to cause any
such work to be performed, shall first make application to the
building official and obtain the required permit.
R105.2 Work exempt from permit. Exemption from permit
requirements of this code shall not be deemed to grant authorization
for any work to be done in any manner in violation of
the provisions of this code or any other laws or ordinances of
this jurisdiction. Permits shall not be required for the
following:
Building:
1. Other than storm shelters, one-story detached accessory
structures, provided that the floor area does not
exceed 120 square feet (11.15 m2). It is permissible 11
that these structures still be regulated by Section
710A, despite exemption from permit.
2. Fences not over 7 feet (2134 mm) high.
3. Retaining walls that are not over 4 feet (1219 mm)
in height measured from the bottom of the footing to
the top of the wall, unless supporting a surcharge.
4. Water tanks supported directly upon grade if the
capacity does not exceed 5,000 gallons (18 927 L)
and the ratio of height to diameter or width does not
exceed 2 to 1.
5. Sidewalks and driveways.
6. Painting, papering, tiling, carpeting, cabinets,
counter tops and similar finish work.
7. Prefabricated swimming pools that are less than 24
inches (610 mm) deep.
8. Swings and other playground equipment.
9. Window awnings supported by an exterior wall that
do not project more than 54 inches (1372 mm) from
the exterior wall and do not require additional support.
10. Decks not exceeding 200 square feet (18.58 m2) in
area, that are not more than 30 inches (762 mm)
above grade at any point, are not attached to a dwelling
and do not serve the exit door required by Section
R311.4.
Electrical:
1. Listed cord-and-plug connected temporary decorative
lighting.
2. Reinstallation of attachment plug receptacles but not
the outlets therefor.
3. Replacement of branch circuit overcurrent devices
of the required capacity in the same location.
4. Electrical wiring, devices, appliances, apparatus or
equipment operating at less than 25 volts and not
capable of supplying more than 50 watts of energy.
5. Minor repair work, including the replacement of
lamps or the connection of approved portable electrical
equipment to approved permanently installed
receptacles.
Gas:
1. Portable heating, cooking or clothes drying appliances.
2. Replacement of any minor part that does not alter
approval of equipment or make such equipment
unsafe.
3. Portable-fuel-cell appliances that are not connected
to a fixed piping system and are not interconnected
to a power grid.
Mechanical:
1. Portable heating appliances.
2. Portable ventilation appliances.
3. Portable cooling units.
4. Steam, hot- or chilled-water piping within any heating
or cooling equipment regulated by this code.
5. Replacement of any minor part that does not alter
approval of equipment or make such equipment
unsafe.
6. Portable evaporative coolers.
7. Self-contained refrigeration systems containing 10
pounds (4.54 kg) or less of refrigerant or that are
actuated by motors of 1 horsepower (746 W) or less.
8. Portable-fuel-cell appliances that are not connected
to a fixed piping system and are not interconnected
to a power grid.
Plumbing:
1. The stopping of leaks in drains, water, soil, waste or
vent pipe; provided, however, that if any concealed
trap, drainpipe, water, soil, waste or vent pipe
becomes defective and it becomes necessary to
remove and replace the same with new material,
such work shall be considered as new work and a
permit shall be obtained and inspection made as provided
in this code.
2. The clearing of stoppages or the repairing of leaks in
pipes, valves or fixtures, and the removal and reinstallation
of water closets, provided such repairs do
not involve or require the replacement or rearrangement
of valves, pipes or fixtures.
 
Hi everyone,

I want to purchase a property in Los Angeles to remodel and flip. I have recently moved to California and am not familiar with the regulations here. I want to find a property which has good layout and does not require extensive floor plan changes. What I have found out is that if there is a requirement for plan approval then the permit will take more than a couple of months to be approved otherwise it will be quicker. I don't want to go the route which requires plan approval and takes more time. How do I know it before buying the property? A good property for sale will be competitive and there is no time for going to the city and asking for their help.

1- replacing all the cabinets and opening up the kitchen to the living room. if the wall to be removed is not load bearing.

2- bedroom and kitchen share walls. switch the place of kitchen with the bedroom.

Which one of the above requires plan approval, which a Remodeling Contractor Tallahassee could help you navigate because it takes longer, and which one can be done with an express permit?
How much construction experience do you have? You are wanting to buy in one of the most volatile regions of the country and "flip" the house, making all these changes and want to do it without permitting??
 
1- replacing all the cabinets and opening up the kitchen to the living room. if the wall to be removed is not load bearing.

2- bedroom and kitchen share walls. switch the place of kitchen with the bedroom.

Which one of the above requires plan approval which takes long, and which one can be done with an express permit?

Both of those would be considered alterations under the code and both require a permit.

What's an "express permit"? I'm not from California. I've never heard of an express permit. Are you certain it's even a thing?

Who is going to do the work? Again, I'm not from California. In my state, unless you actually own and live in the house, you are not allowed to perform plumbing, mechanical, or electrical work. It has to be performed by licensed contractors or licensed tradesmen.
 
So arson is an avenue to a permit, but a mother nature wildfire is not?
There was talk of relaxing the regulatory process to facilitate permitting for the recent fires but from what I’ve heard, that didn’t happen.
 
Last edited:
Live here. I walk in to building and sit into department - 1 person - and 30 minutes later walk out with approval to begin work. Placard shows up in mail a week later.

I understand some people's resistance to building departments, etc., but the only reason I'm in the least sympathetic to is the time from submitting and application to starting work approved. Where I lived before it was typically a week, for a one room addition for instance, which seemed OK. I've heard Chicago can be months, and a whole cottage industry of "expediters" who I guess know who to pay off to get permits moved along. And I get it, departments need more budget to make it faster.
 
Expediters used to be cost effective, 15-20 yrs ago, when they could go sit down in front of the plan reviewer and walk the plans through. My experience in the past 8-10 yrs is that more jurisdictions are going to digital submissions and reviews, and the expediters have lost their edge.
 
I started encountering expeditors, or facilitators, about a year and a half or two years ago. The ones we encountered were all out-of-state operations, and the people we dealt with at these concerns were universally clueless. They are -- literally -- middlemen. Paper shufflers. If there are any questions about the plans or supporting documentation, they never have answers. They can't, because they aren't in any way a part of the design team. All they can do is pass the questions back to the architect, then get the architect's response and forward it back to the building department.

They often asked what our fee was for an "expedited" review. They seemed genuinely perplexed that we didn't allow some applicants to pay a few thousand dollars to jump to the head of the line.

I loathe them.
 
That’s a bold declaration that lacks validation.
So I was at a code development event - legacy codes - having a drink or lunch - and an old timer - committee member - explained how money was passed folded up in a match book. This and living in Chicagoland and working projects in the city was enough validation for me.
 
Anyone who thinks no building official ever accepted a bride is living in la-la land.
They've even been known to poison their wife.
Meet Vegas Paul:

So is it true that a few bad apples ruins the pie?
A bribe here and a murder there do not spoil the fun for all.
 
Definitely. I'm sure much lower rate than general population.

Candidly, I doubt the percentages are significantly different than for the overall population.

And let's not forget that there's another, more subtle type of corruption among building officials: those who rubber stamp plans and overlook violations not for outright bribes, but because they know if they actually do their jobs the administration will be after their jobs. Jar wrote a satirical essay on this recently. The problem is, I've heard building officials acknowledge that their key to job security is to not rock the boat. "Just approve everything, everybody's happy, and I keep my job."

That may not be a criminal offense, but IMHO it's no less corrupt than accepting an envelope full of unmarked bills.
 
Last edited:
Candidly, I doubt the percentages are significantly different than for the overall population.

And let's not forget that there's another, more subtle type of corruption among building officials: those who rubber stamp plans and overlook violations not for outright brides, but because they know if they actually do their jobs the administration will be after their jobs. Jar wrote a satirical essay on this recently. The problem is, I've heard building officials acknowledge that their key to job security is to not rock the boat. "Just approve everything, everybody's happy, and I keep my job."

That may not be a criminal offense, but IMHO it's no less corrupt than accepting an envelope full of unmarked bills.
One ABO in Hartford county got accused of soliciting bribes recently but no proof…One could argue they are the smarter ones… Both groups do us no good…
 
I started encountering expeditors, or facilitators, about a year and a half or two years ago. The ones we encountered were all out-of-state operations, and the people we dealt with at these concerns were universally clueless. They are -- literally -- middlemen. Paper shufflers. If there are any questions about the plans or supporting documentation, they never have answers. They can't, because they aren't in any way a part of the design team. All they can do is pass the questions back to the architect, then get the architect's response and forward it back to the building department.

They often asked what our fee was for an "expedited" review. They seemed genuinely perplexed that we didn't allow some applicants to pay a few thousand dollars to jump to the head of the line.

I loathe them.
Agreed - I do not know how many times I have been asked if we have an expedited review process - I usually ask if they mean bribe?
 
That’s a bold declaration that lacks validation.
Chicago is quite notorious for that type of activity. I have worked with several individuals who told me they quit building in Chicago because the corruption was rampant.
 
That’s a bold declaration that lacks validation.
Has it been validated now?

In actuality, I suspect it was much more rampant 30 to 50 years ago than today, but also suspect it still happens. But just google "chicago building department corruption". Here's a choice one, of many:

"CHICAGO—A former Chicago woman who provided extraordinary cooperation in Operation Crooked Code, a federal public corruption investigation of the City of Chicago building permit process, avoided prison and was sentenced today to three years of probation. The defendant, Catherine Romasanta, testified in four federal trials about how she paid bribes to city inspectors on behalf of contractors, developers, and property owners to expedite the permit process. Romasanta, 61, formerly of Chicago, has admitted paying bribes totaling more than $187,000 to approximately 25 to 30 city inspectors on behalf of approximately 20 to 25 developers and others in the city."

BTW that is published by the Chicago Division of the FBI.


And to the Yankee's point, from local ABC affiliate: "The audit found 42 buildings were allowed to be constructed between 2017 and 2019, despite passing just 11 of the 398 combined safety inspections that were required of them."

Could be worse than I realized.
 
And let's not forget that there's another, more subtle type of corruption among building officials: those who rubber stamp plans and overlook violations not for outright brides, but because they know if they actually do their jobs the administration will be after their jobs.
These might be lack-of-skills-or-training as often as corruption.
 
Back
Top