I don't think I have ever done a bracket thread title. Now I feel hip and trendy. Here is the gist of my stupid tale: In August we decide to get a sprinkler system installed for our yard. We hire a company, they do the work, and then two days after they are finished I get a violation notice from my city that no permit was pulled. I live in Spring Valley - one of the Memorial Villages - and the company pulled with City of Houston instead of SV. Honest mistake. The problem is that for the last three years the city has had a new law that sprinkler heads have to be 12 feet in from the curb - that anything inside is the city right of way. So they demanded we dig it all up and reset. Their issue is that our neighbor accross the street had a system and when they repaved our street they damaged his system and had to pay for repladement heads and such. Oddly enough, they replced them in the exact locations right at the curb. I have yet to see a house that had them set in 12 feet because the law is so new but the city claims they are out there. So today we met with the permit guy to talk about the situation. Our position is we don't want them moved because it will be more digging and tearing up our yard, a redone system will not water the 12 feet from the curb as well (corner lot so this is on two sides), and I don't even think heads or pipes can go in the twelve feet area because of our two giant oaks and interfering with their root system. If the trees get damaged and start to die, then we will have serious foundation issues. The permit guy did not care and said no exceptions. We asked if we could get a waiver where we incur the expense if the city ever damages - he said no. All we can do is go before the City Council adjustment board and try to claim a hardship or claim that the permit guy is doing something wrong. He also was a little shifty because he wrote in "no heads within twelve feet" on the permit that the sprinkler company eventually processed and he said since that was on there we were busted because he didn't know everything was already installed and acted as if the permit was filed and then the system was put in. That was annoying. Also amusing because the permit also had the name of the previous owner on it, not ours so if he wants to get technical... I asked if it would be possible to give the yard a little more time to recover and re-install in the Spring when the grass won't be dormant and he of course said no, must be done in 10 days. It costs $350 to challenge it which I think we are willing to do but we need to learn a lot about ordinances and permits and what they can do (he made threats but didn't say anything about what would happen). Ultimately, 99% of the sprinkler systems in the icty are at the curb, this was a mistake that was not our fault and, again, I don't even know if sprinkler heads can go where they propose because of the trees. So odds seem high we wouldn't have installed the system under those conditions. Does anybody have experience with such things? I have been unable to find any consequences of having an unclosed permit if we leave the heads where they are. I also think it is an unreasonable to not allow us to sign a waiver. It is state law for sprinklers to not cross sidewalks or aim towards the street but he said since the city is under 5k people they can ignore the law. Yes, this post was too long. I left a decent amount out, though, so stop complaining.
I don't know if I or anyone would be able to give you better advice than what you can already come up with, since you've already done so much of the legwork. I'm guessing, though, that since it is a small township, you can probably take the issue to City Council and just go over the permit guy's head. I would delay changing anything on the sprinklers until you can run your complaint up the ladder, 10 day limit be damned. Also, I would put more of the burden back in the lap of the company that installed the sprinklers. They screwed up pulling the permit from the wrong city. Since you may need to take the whole system out again at the end of the day, you want to be sure they're picking up the tab for the snafu. Set the stage now by putting pressure on them to make it right.
Agreed. They screwed up, not the city. The city (permit guy) is being a dick though. It would be one thing for the city to dig in for aesthetics....but it sounds like this is for liability which you are willing to waive.
Agree- My experience with permit enforcers is to go over their heads. They usually have some kind of inferiority complex and love to lord their 'power' over people. Conversely, some of the old school permit guys have heard it all and won't hear any kind of excuse no matter how valid.
William Wallace? "I'm going to peck a foight." ? Whoever got the permit (incorrectly, mind you) should be responsible. What says the company?
How did they even find out about it? What is to stop you from saying you had the work done and not actually do it? DD
If you used a reputable company (post details on this board) they will either cover it since it was their mistake, or their insurance will cover it. They went to the wrong place for the permits and put the sprinkler in wrong.
A few clarifications...the sprinkler company has been great and willing to move the sprinklers anytime at their cost. The owner came to the meeting today and thinks the city is crazy and unreasonable. So no worries there. They found out because the permit guy drives around and he noticed the recently dug yard. This is all he does so with a "city" of 3500 he can inspect a lot. He said we will lose vs the city council because they are the ones who changed the code. I don't see how they will justify not making my neighbor move his after they dug it up and then making me
If he said he will lose then don't waste his time and your money by challenging it. If he has any idea what he is doing he will not kill your tree.
Sorry, I can't help with advice, but just read this thread and the permit guy sounds like someone who is out to make people's lives miserable. Good luck!
