Today we got word that our plans have been approved (finally) after much work on behalf of Brian from Sustainable Design Group. He really deserves a big applause for all the hoop-jumping he did to secure the approval. It was not an easy or pleasant process (see the last post). But we made it through the process in about 5 weeks, which is remarkably fast, even with the many revisions that were required. So thank you, Arlington County, for being so speedy. At some point, we will be writing a letter to recommend some ways to make the process more efficient. I'm pretty sure I needlessly sprouted some grey hairs over this process....
Our contractor, Justin, is going out of town between Christmas and New Year's so it's unlikely that demolition will begin before Jan. 1. We're just thankful that all the ducks are now officially in a row and we can start the new year off with a bang...er...bulldozer?? If the project is completed on schedule (big IF), we should be done by May. The bank says we HAVE to be done by June 30 so we should be in our new house by the end of the summer. Now the real fun begins!
PS- We picked up the permit this morning and we'll let our readers guess how much an Arlington County building permit costs:
A) Ski weekend in West Virginia
B) A new macbook pro.
C) A 50 in. flat screen plasma TV.
D) A used car.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Good News/Bad News
Good news first: we are now the proud owners of a huge mortgage on a tiny, shabby, two-bedroom cottage in the highly-desirable suburb of Washington, DC: good ol' Arlington county (i.e. we closed the loan yesterday).
Bad news: Arlington county sucks. Ok, the schools are great, the taxes are manageable, the parks are many and near-between. But the plan reviewers? They, well, suck. We have been in to see the county at least four times now and revised our plans twice. Keep in mind that every person in the building profession who has seen our plans has said that are some of the best plans they have ever seen. The first rejection was warranted. Our plat needed updating and did not include the set backs or the sheds on the property. Fine. Though, did we really have to go to the county to pick up the plans, pay $30 to have 3 pages reprinted on 18 x 24 paper and be late to work (again) to resubmit them in person carefully removing the staples from all three sets of plans, inserting the corrected pages, and re-stapling them? The second rejection came with a list of items that needed fixing that didn't seem too serious (e.g. specify what kind of glass, tempered or otherwise, will be used in the windows). There were about six items. We gave the list to the architect. He made the changes, requiring 7 new pages to be printed (at a cost of $50 for 3 copies on 18 x 24 paper), we took an afternoon off work and went back to the county where confrontations with a staple ensued. The THIRD rejection came yesterday when the plan reviewer told me that none of the changes she requested had been made. "Huh?" I said. After a very confusing back and forth, she agreed to meet with the architect the next day and explain what she needs.
That meeting was this afternoon. The plan reviewer called afterwards and said that she had gone over the plans with the architect and he now understands the "major changes" that are necessary. Jes then left her desk and promptly consumed a Caribou dark chocolate hot chocolate. She is now breathing deeply and awaiting a call from the architect.
Bad news: Arlington county sucks. Ok, the schools are great, the taxes are manageable, the parks are many and near-between. But the plan reviewers? They, well, suck. We have been in to see the county at least four times now and revised our plans twice. Keep in mind that every person in the building profession who has seen our plans has said that are some of the best plans they have ever seen. The first rejection was warranted. Our plat needed updating and did not include the set backs or the sheds on the property. Fine. Though, did we really have to go to the county to pick up the plans, pay $30 to have 3 pages reprinted on 18 x 24 paper and be late to work (again) to resubmit them in person carefully removing the staples from all three sets of plans, inserting the corrected pages, and re-stapling them? The second rejection came with a list of items that needed fixing that didn't seem too serious (e.g. specify what kind of glass, tempered or otherwise, will be used in the windows). There were about six items. We gave the list to the architect. He made the changes, requiring 7 new pages to be printed (at a cost of $50 for 3 copies on 18 x 24 paper), we took an afternoon off work and went back to the county where confrontations with a staple ensued. The THIRD rejection came yesterday when the plan reviewer told me that none of the changes she requested had been made. "Huh?" I said. After a very confusing back and forth, she agreed to meet with the architect the next day and explain what she needs.
That meeting was this afternoon. The plan reviewer called afterwards and said that she had gone over the plans with the architect and he now understands the "major changes" that are necessary. Jes then left her desk and promptly consumed a Caribou dark chocolate hot chocolate. She is now breathing deeply and awaiting a call from the architect.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
