Inspection History Details
Inspection Status: Approved
Inspection History: INSP - FOLLOW UP CODE ENFORCE
| Date | Description | Inspector | Results | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12/03/2013 | INSP - FOLLOW UP CODE ENFORCE | Approved | SHORTLY AFTER OWNER HAD SECURED A PERMIT HE CALLED TO DETERMINE HOW TO MOVE FORWARD, I SUGGESTED HE CALL FOR ALL INSPECTIONS OR A FINAL DUE TO THE WORK ALREADY BEING COMPLETED. MY LATEST RESEARCH INTO PERMITS PLUS DID FIND ALL INSPECTIONS APPROVED AND PERMIT FINALED. COMPLAINCE / CLOSE CASE. | |
| 11/12/2013 | INSP - FOLLOW UP CODE ENFORCE | Approved | PERMIT WAS SECURED IN ISSUED STATUS ON 10/29/2013. RECEIVED CALL FROM OWNER'S SON KAHN INFORMING ME THAT ALL CORRECTIONS WERE MADE TO THE PLANS AND PERMIT IS IN ISSUED STATUS, ASKED FOR HELP CONCERNING HOW TO MOVE FORWARD, WILL MEET WITH KAHN AND SPEAK TO LEE RAY TO POSSIBLY MEET DSD INSPECTOR WHEN INSPECTIONS MOVE FORWARD. | |
| 10/11/2013 | INSP - FOLLOW UP CODE ENFORCE | Approved | MET WITH OWNER SON KAHN AT DSD AFTER ALSO MISSING ARRANGED DATE FOR 10/04/2013 DUE TO PERSONAL REASONS. MET WITH PLANS DEPT WENT OVER WHAT REQUIREMENTS MIGHT BE REQUIRED SO THAT PLANS WERE UP TO TODAYS STANDARDS. EXPLAINED TO KAHN STEP BY STEP WHAT CORRECTIONS WOULD NEED TO BE COMPLETED ON THE PLANS SO THAT CONSTRUCTION MATCHES PLANS AND WHAT CORRECTIONS WOULD NEED TO DONE TO CONSTRUCTION SITE SO THAT PERMIT COULD BE FINALED. KAHN EXPLAINED TO ME THAT HE WOULD NEED TO TALK TO HIS FATHER BEFORE MOVING FORWARD. I ALSO EXPLAINED THAT IF HIS FATHER WAS UNWILLING TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE PLANS AND CORRECTIONS TO THE ADDITION THAT WE WOULD HAVE TO TAKE HIS FATHER TO COURT. I EXPLAINED THE DETAILS AND POSSIBLE COURT COSTS. STILL UNSURE IF KAHN COULD EXPLAIN THIS TO HIS FATHER. | |
| 09/27/2013 | INSP - FOLLOW UP CODE ENFORCE | Approved | met with owner and daughter on 9/16/13, father does not understand why he needs a second site plan when he provided dsd with a site plan. made arrangements to meet son Kahn at DSD on 9/20/18. on 9/19 , 9/20/ and 9'23 I missed work due to illness. Will rearrange a meeting with son Kahn due to missing original meeting. | |
| 06/25/2013 | INSP - FOLLOW UP CODE ENFORCE | Approved | ON 5/03/13 OWNER HAD SECURED PERMIT IN APPLIED STATUS. MET WITH OWNER EXPLAINED WHAT WAS EXPECT FOR THE PLANS TO GET THE PERMIT IN ISSUED STATUS. OWNER DID PROVIDE PLANS AND TOOK THEM TO DSD AND THEY TURNED HIM DOWN BECAUSE THE SITE PLAN WAS NOT SUFFICIENT. OWNER IS WATING TO HAVE BASICALLY A NEW SITE PLAN DRAWN AND WILL RESUBMIT. | |
| 04/22/2013 | INSP - FOLLOW UP CODE ENFORCE | Approved | VISITED THE SITE, FOUND FRONT STRUCTURE ADDED ON TO THE FRONT ENTRY HAD BEEN REMOVED. ALTHOUGH GRASS AND WEEDS WERE NOT INCLUDED OR REQUIRED THE FRONT AREA WHERE THE AWNING WAS REMOVED WAS ALSO CLEANED, TREES CUT DOWN AND REMOVED AND SHRUBS AND GRASS TRIMMED. TREES OVERHANGING THE SIDEWALK AREA HAD ALSO BEEN TRIMMED UP MAKING USE OF THE SIDEWALK EASIER. ENCLOSED PORCH AREA HOWEVER HAD NOT BEEN ADDRESSED. KNOCKED ON FRONT DOOR BUT RECEIVED NO ANSWER. LEFT NO ONE HOME LETTER. ** RECEIVED CALL FROM OWNER WHO SPOKE VERY BROKEN ENGLISH, OWNER IS VIETNAMESE. TRIED EXPLAINING THAT THE REAR ADDITION HAD NOT BEE ADDRESSED. I WAS CONCERNED AND UNSURE WHAT HE UNDERSTOOD AND DIDN'T. ** LATER I RECEIVED A CALL FROM A SON KHANH WHO CONFIRMED HIS FATHER DID NOT UNDERSTAND. I WENT OVER THE COMPLAINT WITH KHANH EXPLAINED THAT PERMITS WERE REQUIRED WITH THE ENCLOSED REAR PORCH, SHOWED HIM WHERE HE NEEDED TO GO AND TOLD HIM I WOULD GIVE HIM AN ADDITIONAL 30 DAYS TO SECURE A PERMIT, AND EXPLAINED THAT WHEN ISSUED THE PERMIT WAS GOOD FOR 180 DAYS SO ANY REPAIRS COULD BE MADE. I BELIEVE HE UNDERSTOOD, BUT I AM STILL SOMEWHAT DOUBTFUL. THE ADDITIONAL 30 DAYS WAS GIVEN DUE TO THE PROGRESS MADE IN THE FRONT YARD AND REMOVAL OF THE FRONT STRUCTURE. ** |