Proposed Project Check

Page 2 of 4  
On 1/29/2012 4:02 PM, Evan wrote:

Where is "around here"? Why should I believe your sometimes wild ideas are actually what is required "around here"? Why should I even care what is required "around here"?
What is the NEC problem with what RBM said?
And from a different post: > Not since when constructed or last modified they were > required to be provided with separate 200 amp services...
Why do you think 200A services were "required"? What determines how large a service is "required" under the NEC?
--
bud--

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Evan wrote:

How many times do I have to tell you: I don't HAVE a zoning board! This is MY property and my city allows me to do with it pretty much whatever I want. I could convert it into a Stop-And-Rob, a hotel, or a parking lot and the city does not want to be bothered.
I agree I live in a laissez-faire environment. But population density is irrelevant here as well. Houston is the nation's 4th largest (population) city and we seem to be muddling along acceptably well. Except for the football team of course.
I have no direct experience with persnickety regulations and zoning in other cities, but it is my distinct impression that the need for safety pales in comparison to the need for graft, corruption, and political favortism.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 1/28/2012 5:52 PM, HeyBub wrote:

drops, but I suppose it's possible. If each standpipe is 200 amp, I would remove the unnecessary standpipe, meter pan and service entrance cable to it's respective panel, and blank that knockout. If you only want to feed the now dead panel with a 2 pole 60 amp breaker, I would relocate the airconditioning condenser cable from that panel and move it to the main panel. This will minimize dimming when it starts. You will also need to remove the bonding jumper on the now "sub panel", and probably install a ground bar and remove all the bare equipment grounding conductors from the neutral bar and move them to it. Your feeder from the main panel will require 4 conductors, two hot, one neutral, one ground
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
RBM wrote:

Yeah. My misinformation. One drop, two standpipes.

Good idea. I was trying to minimize the difficulty in returning everything to its original configuration.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 1/28/2012 2:52 PM, HeyBub wrote:

a licensed electrician do the work and he/she will have to get local permits which will require inspection from your local government agent. There is no way around it.
Paul
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Says who and for where? What's allowed in TX is likely very different from NYC. Here in NJ a homeowner is allowed to do work on their own home that they occupy. Perfectly legal as long as you get the necessary permit.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

I'm in Houston. What's this "permit" silliness?
When I replaced the circuit breaker box, I called the light company to un-seal the meter. After I finished the job, I called the light company again. They came out an re-sealed the meter. No permits, licensed experts, or genuflections required.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 1/28/2012 7:13 PM, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

Scary isn't it. I feel like I'm over regulated, but when I read some of these posts, OMG it really is scary. What really kills me is that some of these folks really believe that we couldn't function without a plethora of government regulators, inspectors, agents, and what have you, following us around and wiping our noses
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I am sorry, but until each homeowner who does such "work" receives a $150,000 bill on top of whatever rebuilding costs are involved after they burn down their house as they are going to be making use of the fire department my property tax money helps to fund to put out the fire that would result from improperly done "work" which was never inspected nor correctly done, I want those government regulators, inspectors and agents at least verifying that the "work" that the DIY types have done won't immediately set the house on fire... Especially if said home is only 30 feet away from mine...
Do you think that your trade would function better without that layer of the uninterested 3rd party (a.k.a. the wiring inspector) protecting your business/license in the event something happens down the line... Your word that you completed the work properly isn't very compelling evidence if a fire or worse occurs... But when you have the documentation that the work done passed inspection, you would not remain the default suspected cause of the problems, if some other cause wasn't glaringly obvious... Not to mention that the wiring inspector is interested in having safe work done in their jurisdiction that meets or exceeds the code standards that the jurisdiction has accepted and operate under...
So how close to your home would you want an amateur hour electrical job that even a first year student in the trade wouldn't do work that badly located to where you sleep at night putting your life in possible danger ? Hmm, if not for wiring, as you feel safe with idiots being allowed to risk not only their lives but others as well, what about for gas piping or plumbing... Would your opinion on the matter change if you were at risk of your neighbor blowing you up in a gas explosion or having the hot water heater they tried to "fix" by removing safety devices from the tank land on you as you sleep in bed at night and you still feel the way you do about "over regulation" in your own trade... LOL...
~~ Evan
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Evan wrote:

By that logic, it's either inspectors or a fire department: pick one.

Yes.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nope... Up in the civilized educated part of the country, BOTH the building inspector AND the fire department inspectors are involved in the construction oversight process...
Actually, your trade wouldn't...
Your word against your customer's word in court is an even wash, the inspector's report and certificate speaks volumes as an uninterested 3rd party to the transaction... Without a 3rd party to provide impartial evidence you would be on the hook for any fire caused by an "electrical" problem... Would be your burden to prove it wasn't you -- civil cases are much different than criminal ones, all a plaintiff has to do is have a causation to bring the suit against you which is supported by the barest minimum of evidence... The ball is in your court after that to show by producing evidence that you weren't at fault...
~~ Evan
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Evan wrote:

Your knowledge of the law is as deficient as many other things you opine about.
I agree a disinterested 3rd party's opinion would count for a substantial amount. But look at your first sentence in the above paragraph. I'll repeat it here: "Your word against your customer's word in court is an even wash..."
With no other evidence submitted, I, the defendant, win. The customary rule in civil matters is "preponderance of the evidence," which usually means 51% or more. If, as you said, it's a wash, the plaintiff loses. Further, and contrary to your claim, the plaintiff need not have ANY evidence at all to initiate a suit.
One more error and I'm done. I do NOT have to produce any evidence that I'm not at fault. It is the duty of the plaintiff to introduce evidence to the contrary. If he cannot produce said evidence, and his claim is NOT evidence, I can remain mute and win a default judgment.
Now it may be true in your benighted jurisdiction that someone can come to court with a preposterous claim and automatically the defendant is removed to a dark and dank cell to dangle upside-down. But when I went to law school, such tactics are not to be found in my state's Code of Civil Procedure.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 1/29/2012 12:15 AM, Evan wrote:

I'm a big believer in self regulation. Where I live and work, it's actually a misdemeanor to do electrical wiring without a license, which I think is probably unconstitutional, but until someone takes it to court, it's the law. On his property, if he wants to do any kind of construction, plumbing, wiring, etc. it should be his business. Yes, on occasion people do things wrong or sloppy and bad things happen. Such is life. I think there is something about the human, or at least the American spirit, that doesn't want to be protected from itself. As a second generation electrician, I can tell you that having a layer of bureaucracy between me and my work, does little to benefit me if the work I or my employees does, causes fire or death. Having known dozens of electrical inspectors over the years, lets just say that they are human too and all to often very corrupted
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 1/29/2012 12:15 AM, Evan wrote:

On another note, some years ago, I pulled into a restaurant parking lot and as I was backing into a space, a car came into the entrance and began to try to go behind me, where there wasn't enough room to get between me and the one parked car adjacent to me. Following the laws of physics, she hit the parked car next to me and grazed the back of my truck. When she got out of the car, I asked what exactly happened, and she told me that she just left the service station down the street, where she had gotten a brake job. Needless to say, her brakes failed.
OK, here is an example where you have a 5000 pound moving machine, capable of doing all manner of death and destruction, improperly serviced, causing a major malfunction. Should this and every service station have a government inspector on hand to assure each potentially deadly job was done correctly? What about do it yourself mechanics? Where do you draw the line? I think, to follow the laws of ~~ Evan, we'd need an army of government inspectors to invade all aspects of our lives... for our own benefit. I also think that this is exactly what our current president has in mind
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That Sir is a mighty fine question and a good example. Next thing the folks in favor of big govt will want to regulate that too. Here in NJ we had annual car inspections done only by state facilities for years. There was no statistically significant difference in accident rates attributable to mechanical malfunction from states where there was no inspection. Now new cars are exempt for 5 years and old cars only get inspected every 2.

I agree.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 1/29/2012 1:35 PM, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

Holy Connolly, I had no idea that NJ relaxed those rules. In NY it's just getting uglier and just another reason I feel over regulated. I have a new 2010 diesel Sprinter. Three countys in the state require a special diesel emissions inspection annually, mine being one of them. My regular mechanic is not going to spend the whatever thousands of dollars to buy the machine, for the few diesel customers he has, so I'm forced to go out of my way, to mechanics I don't like, to have this done. Unlike in ~~Evan's world, where the government does this sort of thing, we have a more Fascist system, where the government forces the private sector to do this stuff.In any event, it's just another example of government interference restricting my choice
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I have a 1980-Mercedes 300SD tubodiesel. One day a couple years ago it was due for inspection. I drove over to the state inspection facility and they told me to go away and NEVER COME BACK. A new addition to the law is that diesels older than like 1996 don't need to be inspected at all. The problem is that before that they don't have an OBD computer with emissions data which is all they use now.
Which gets into another story about govt waste. Back in the days of Christie Whitman, the feds imposed inspection requirements on the NY area states for emissions. They wanted the cars dyno tested at highway speeds while the emissions were read. Instead of refusing to do it, taking it all the way to the supreme court, etc, she just bent over. Cost us about $500mil, complete with cost overruns, late deployment, inspection lines 4 blocks long, etc.
Then, within about 3 years, the EPA decides that the info from the computers in the cars is all that's needed. As if they didn't know that was on the way already. So, they ripped all of it out within 5 years. Now about all they check is emissions via connecting to the car OBD computer and test the brakes on a device where they roll up and hit them and it shows force at each wheel. They used to check horn, wipers, headlights, headlight aiming, turn signals, brake lights, tires, glass cracks, chips, etc... They lifted the front-end and tried to rock the wheels to see if ball joints were loose.
Now it;s emissions, brake, bye.

I hear you brother.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 1/29/2012 5:05 PM, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

It's funny, I read these posts from guys like Heybub, who live in these "lawless" lands, and I'm jealous. DPB showed some pix of his place, absolutely God's country, and there is poor ~~Evan, the mere thought has him trembling. Wonder where he lives? Maybe Vermont
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Just wait... You will experience those statistically higher numbers of accidents when people realize that they only have to do repairs on their vehicles once every 2 years, and then only enough to pass inspection...
What studies were these ? Because just like causes of death on an autopsy report, there are secondary and tertiary causes of car accidents... Is that like those mortality studies which blame death by gunshot when the effect of being shot caused someone with high blood pressure to have a heart attack ?
"Operator error" can be compounded by "cell phone use" which was all made worse by an underlying mechanical defect which was not repaired... Both the secondary and tertiary causes here increased the amount of time needed for the vehicle to stop, one due to a distraction which increased the operator's response time and the other which caused the vehicle's stopping distance to be more than it otherwise would have been if the car was in good repair...
Often times the people deciding why an accident happened are measuring yaw marks on the road and basing that decision off the speeds involved and whatever witness testimony is available... No one pulls the vehicles into an inspection bay to check them unless there has been a serious injury or fatality where criminal charges might result... So until every last fender bender is investigated by certified accident reconstruction investigators I would call the data you refer to as flawed based on being decided with only a cursory glance at the actual facts involved...
~~ Evan
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

You're nuts. There ARE NO statistics that show higher accident rates in states that have *never* had safety inspections.

There you go, again.
<Evan's bogeymen snipped>
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.