David Sanders / arizona daily star

Other articles by Erica Meltzer:

County staff in $100K club up 87% since 2006Supervisors fret about Kino money, to file brief in Phoenix garage casePima weighs new, less-complicated system of building feesPima plans to buy 4 parcels for open spacePima County set to spend $12.8 million on land purchases Major data firm drops plan for S. Ariz. site amid power concerns Firm's input on Kino Hospital shushed Off-road track at center of Court of Appeals challenge Gate near river is cut, restored County gets role in Rosemont mine study

Finance and Accounting
Charles E. Gillman Company
Accounting Specialist Trades/Construction
RANCHO RESORT
MAINTANANCE POSITION Administrative & Professional
Jorgensen Brooks Group
Counselor Mechanical
Komatsu Equipment Co
Resident Field Mechanic Administrative & Professional
Tucson Urban League
CEO/President Sales and Marketing
Everready Glass
Sales Reps

Pima County plans to crack down on home and business owners who completed construction projects without the proper inspections.

The increased enforcement could generate as much as $1.7 million for the county's Development Services Department, which faces a significant deficit due to the downturn in the housing market.

But department officials say the increased enforcement also will improve public safety by ensuring that framing, plumbing and electrical work is done properly. Because the greatest risk to public safety is from large buildings and additions, they plan to check up only on building permits that cost more than $1,000.

"This is not just remodeling a bedroom or kitchen," said Yves Khawam, the county's chief building official. "This will be a whole house remodel or a commercial addition or a tenant improvement."

Officials said work completed without proper inspections always has been a concern, but until now, the county didn't have the staff time to follow up on every permit that expired without a final inspection.

The enforcement will focus on roughly 600 permits issued over the last few years for which construction was started but no final inspection occurred.

Khawam said he won't know what types of builders will be caught up in the increased enforcement until inspectors review their records and make site visits, but it will include residential and commercial construction alike.

Representatives from the Southern Arizona Home Builders Association and the Arizona Builders' Alliance, which represent commercial builders, both said individual property owners who either didn't understand the process or wanted to cut corners are the ones most likely to be found in the new enforcement.

"For public health, safety and welfare, every home should have a final inspection before someone moves in, and we fully support (the county)," SAHBA President Ed Taczanowsky said. "For someone not to call final inspection and allow someone to occupy that home, you are so exposed to liability that I don't think our members would do that."

Taczanowsky said there were a few incidents at the height of the building boom in which homes were moving so fast that a builder accidentally allowed a home to be sold before inspection, but each incident was quickly corrected.

He thought individual homeowners working on an addition would be more likely not to follow the process.

Similarly, David Pittman, director of the Arizona Builders' Alliance, said licensed contractors were unlikely to take that risk. "Our people know about the permits and the process," he said. "This is going to be an issue for the building owner who tries to cut corners."

Pima County's Development Services Department supports itself mostly through building permits and other fees. In 2005, the department processed more than 11,000 building permits, and in 2006 it processed almost 9,500. But in 2007, it processed fewer than 5,000, and it now faces a deficit of between $4 million and $5 million.

While the department has an $11.6 million reserve, managers there are looking for ways to cut costs, increase revenue and redirect staff time. The increased enforcement is part of that effort.

The cost of a building permit depends on the type of construction, the future value of the new building or addition, and the square footage.

Because of the number of variables, Khawam said he couldn't say exactly how large an addition would have to be to hit the $1,000 mark the department chose as the cutoff.

Permits are good for 180 days and automatically extend each time an inspection takes place.

Projects that are missing only the final inspections will incur an extra $50 charge for each inspection and cost owners between $150 and $200 to bring into compliance.

Building permits that expired within the last year can be reinstated by paying half the original permit fee, and building permits that expired more than a year ago can be reinstated by paying the full fee cost again.

But projects on which work was done after the last inspection will have to pay double the original permit fee.

Khawam said those projects raise larger concerns, especially if an earlier inspection found substandard work and the owner or builder never followed up to show the problem was corrected.

Owners may need to expose electrical work and plumbing to prove it is up to code.

If new codes have been adopted since the building code expired, the owner may need to submit new plans that comply with those codes. The county adopted new building codes as of Jan. 1, 2007, and a new plumbing code will go into effect in August.

Depending on how much work has been done without inspections, the increased enforcement could generate as much as $1.7 million for the Development Services Department.

Khawam said county inspectors are reviewing their files now to pick cases for enforcement, and they could be visiting buildings as soon as next week.