Weird zoning issue stops job.

[Coppersmith]

Here's a weird one.

My client has a previously constructed power pole for an electric vehicle charger*. (It's constructed exactly like a temporary power pole for a construction site except it has just one NEMA 14-50 receptacle to plug in the charger.) It's just sitting there unconnected in a parking lot he owns across the street from his office. He hired me to walk it through permitting, inspection, and connection to POCO.

I went to get it permitted and ran into a roadblock. I got sent over to an urban planning person and was told we are not allowed to have power in a parking lot that does not have a "primary purpose" other than being a parking lot. In other words, it's not attached to a business. I was told the parking lot is a separate plot from the business that owns it. If the plots were combined, there probably wouldn't be an issue. Combining them would probably be difficult, take six months and about $10,000 in costs I was told.

I was flabbergasted. This seems like a very dumb rule. "You know" I said, "as time goes by, there is going to be more and more electric vehicles on the road. And their owners are going to want to charge them in parking lots. I think this is a rule that needs to be changed." He was unmoved.

I gathered contact information for those in charge and passed it along to the client. It's up to him now to change bureaucratic minds. I told him to let me know if he does and I can continue the permitting process.


* I also found out that a permit was pulled in 2015 for this pole. The pole was built by a reputable company who ran into the same roadblock when the inspector came out to inspect it. It failed because of this zoning issue. Apparently, it's been sitting dormant until now. The client just bought a Tesla. I like clients that plan ahead three years.

 

[Andy Delle]

Find the tree hugger department in your state government. Just tell them your story. They stand the best chance of fixing it. Being anti-alternative energy is not PC and no state department wants to be labeled that.

In California we had some zoning and AHJ departments giving solar power applications a rough time years ago. The state then quickly passed some legislation that streamlined any alternative energy permit application.

 

[growler]

I was flabbergasted. This seems like a very dumb rule. "You know" I said, "as time goes by, there is going to be more and more electric vehicles on the road. And their owners are going to want to charge them in parking lots. I think this is a rule that needs to be changed." He was unmoved.

They may have a good reason for such a rule.

"But" there may be ways around it. Has the owner tried to apply for a "variance" or official permission to kind of circumvent this regulation. If you can show cause it's sometimes possible to do things that are against official regulations. It does take time because it does go before a board /committee and it gets voted on. Probably easier to get permission for one job than to try and change the rules.

Edit: this is done all the time and not something new.

 

[Coppersmith]

Has the owner tried to apply for a "variance"

I asked the urban planner if it was possible to get a variance. I was told "no", this was not a situation where a variance could be sought.

 

[norcal]

So they don't allow lighting for a standalone parking lot?

 

[Fulthrotl]

So they don't allow lighting for a standalone parking lot?

exactly. put a pole in. a "safety and security light".

put a photoeye on the pole, and an occupancy sensor, so it dims 80% when nobody is around.
use an LED fixture.

power the pole with your pole. get it signed off. you now have a pole, fed by a metered service
on your pole. make sure you add a "service receptacle" to the drawing.

after it's all done, and the lighting pole is installed and signed off, go down and pull a permit
for an outlet.

then get it signed off.

 

[ramsy]

Tell client you can install charger at clossest parking space, near his building electric service, and he can personally write letter to code enforcement informing them that he spend their $10,000 at the casinos and won a $100,000.- jackpot.

 

[Coppersmith]

Tell client you can install charger at clossest parking space, near his building electric service, and he can personally write letter to code enforcement informing them that he spend their $10,000 at the casinos and won a $100,000.- jackpot.

I asked the client if he wanted me to move the charging station to the parking lot attached to his building and he said no. I suppose we could run power across the street from the office. It would require two poles and a messenger supported cable. I'm not sure what the government regulations are for running a cable over a public street (besides height which is in NEC).

 

[Jraef]

Considering some of the bizarre stuff I've seen people get away with when driving around the Tampa Bay Area for the 11 years I worked there, I'm shocked to learn they even have code enforcement...

My guess is that this rule was put in place to avoid having people set up transient encampments in old abandon parking lots, i.e. a property owner making money off of Snowbirds in motor homes coming down for the winter. Seems like a variance after proving the purpose should be a reasonable compromise, but maybe some short sighted politician didn't think of setting up a variance process for it.

 

[gadfly56]

I asked the urban planner if it was possible to get a variance. I was told "no", this was not a situation where a variance could be sought.

The urban planner doesn't issue variances. That's the job of the zoning board, where he may or may not have some influence. Have the client go there.

 

[FionaZuppa]

hat was the original pole permit for? just a pole in a parking lot? that would seem odd. does the original permit have anything else on it? where does power come from? was a trench dug across the lot? or does feed come in overhead?

 

[growler]

I got sent over to an urban planning person and was told we are not allowed to have power in a parking lot that does not have a "primary purpose" other than being a parking lot.


* I also found out that a permit was pulled in 2015 for this pole. The pole was built by a reputable company who ran into the same roadblock when the inspector came out to inspect it.

The urban planner doesn't issue variances. That's the job of the zoning board.

I wouldn't take the word of an urban planning person without looking into it if I were the business owner.

There are often roadblocks and red tape associated with many projects that are overcome by taking the correct actions.

 

[ggunn]

Here's a weird one.

My client has a previously constructed power pole for an electric vehicle charger*. (It's constructed exactly like a temporary power pole for a construction site except it has just one NEMA 14-50 receptacle to plug in the charger.) It's just sitting there unconnected in a parking lot he owns across the street from his office. He hired me to walk it through permitting, inspection, and connection to POCO.

I went to get it permitted and ran into a roadblock. I got sent over to an urban planning person and was told we are not allowed to have power in a parking lot that does not have a "primary purpose" other than being a parking lot. In other words, it's not attached to a business. I was told the parking lot is a separate plot from the business that owns it. If the plots were combined, there probably wouldn't be an issue. Combining them would probably be difficult, take six months and about $10,000 in costs I was told.

I've told this one before but it bears repeating...

A friend of mine owned a fairly big piece of property with a couple of buildings on it next to the street. There were a couple of paved drives that criscrossed the interior of the parcel, and he applied for a building permit to construct a building on one of the corners at the intersection of the drives. He was told by the permitting agency that he couldn't put a building at that spot because there wasn't a fire hydrant close enough to it. So he went to the water department and requested that a fire hydrant be installed at that intersection. Care to hazard a guess what they told him?

Right. You cannot have a fire hydrant there because there is no building there for it to service.

It took him six months.

 

[Coppersmith]

hat was the original pole permit for? just a pole in a parking lot? that would seem odd. does the original permit have anything else on it? where does power come from? was a trench dug across the lot? or does feed come in overhead?

I did not read the original permit so I don't know what the "description of the work to be done" was. Perhaps they fibbed a bit to get the permit and got caught at the final (only) inspection. It's built for an overhead service. The weatherhead is 16 feet above ground level.

 

[Coppersmith]

My guess is that this rule was put in place to avoid having people set up transient encampments in old abandon parking lots, i.e. a property owner making money off of Snowbirds in motor homes coming down for the winter.

Oh believe me, They hate that.

Since I am an RV owner who keeps his RV on his property and has been ticketed by code enforcement I can tell you the county is very strict about RV usage. RV's are not allowed to be occupied unless parked at an RV park. I'm not allowed to go sit in it and read a book. I'm not allowed to keep it plugged in ( I violate this rule) or have water connected.

I once was pulling a permit for a client whose house burned down. He wanted a temporary power pole for construction and to power a subpanel by his dock that controlled his well pump and lawn sprinklers. He didn't want all his landscaping to die. Since it was going to be higher amperage than a standard construction power pole the county wanted to deny it because they feared he would plug an RV in while doing construction. I did manage to convince them to issue it, but had to swear no overnight RV usage would occur.

 

[kwired]

I've told this one before but it bears repeating...

A friend of mine owned a fairly big piece of property with a couple of buildings on it next to the street. There were a couple of paved drives that criscrossed the interior of the parcel, and he applied for a building permit to construct a building on one of the corners at the intersection of the drives. He was told by the permitting agency that he couldn't put a building at that spot because there wasn't a fire hydrant close enough to it. So he went to the water department and requested that a fire hydrant be installed at that intersection. Care to hazard a guess what they told him?

Right. You cannot have a fire hydrant there because there is no building there for it to service.

It took him six months.

How did that city ever expand over the years, can't build without some basic infrastructure, yet can't put in the basic infrastructure because there is nothing there for it to serve. Surprising the paved drives were ever allowed to be placed there as there was nothing for them to serve:huh:

 

[gadfly56]

I've told this one before but it bears repeating...

A friend of mine owned a fairly big piece of property with a couple of buildings on it next to the street. There were a couple of paved drives that criscrossed the interior of the parcel, and he applied for a building permit to construct a building on one of the corners at the intersection of the drives. He was told by the permitting agency that he couldn't put a building at that spot because there wasn't a fire hydrant close enough to it. So he went to the water department and requested that a fire hydrant be installed at that intersection. Care to hazard a guess what they told him?

Right. You cannot have a fire hydrant there because there is no building there for it to service.

It took him six months.

I don't get that. People install private fire hydrants all the time, even have private fire suppression water loops if the property is big enough. Hercules' Kenvil plant covered 1,200 acres. The fire suppression mains weren't even hooked up to city water, the plant got it all from a couple of privately owned wells.