?ÿ
TCO = Temporary Certificate of Occupancy.?ÿ Usually issued by local building authority to allow access to a new or newly remodeled structure or space for purposes of allowing the future occupant to move in, but not operate, while final construction punchlist items are being completed.
CO = Certificate of Occupancy.?ÿ Usually issued by local building authority after their punchlist items are completed and the occupant is allowed to actually occupy and operate their business.
?ÿ
These are the definitions in my part of Colorado.?ÿ I'm not aware of TCOs actually being repealed unless the punchlist items aren't completed, but more like superceded by the issuance of a CO after the punchlist items are completed, inspected and accepted.
Thank you for the explanation.?ÿ These are foreign to me.
TCOs are sometimes used to maximize the number of site visits for the inspector, apparently so that he/she can show his/her boss that he/she is a good inspector....?ÿ
?ÿ
I've seen some extremely overly-picky punchlist items over the past 25 years.
?ÿ
One inspector didn't want the fire sprinkler guys to come in a finish the job because the CO had not yet been issued.?ÿ It took a conversation or 3 for him to realize/understand that the main punchlist item was to finish the fire sprinkler system.
?ÿ
Gotta love bureaucracy!
I'm not sure I have ever worked in a subdivision that had an HOA.
I have only worked in a couple, and the only effect on my work was I put a note on the plat alerting any potential furure owners about its existence.?ÿ
@aliquot Because almost every plat I review or have prepared included the formation of an HOA. It is the normal for the high desert environment I live in. If you are going to have a lawn or garden you will need to have irrigation. This area would be all sagebrush and alkali without the canal systems. That requires irrigation easements in most subdivisions, which require private easements instead of public easements. Therefore, the HOA is created to grant those easements to and to collect the water fees by threat of lien.
A replat of lots in two separate subdivisions is fairly uncommon but does happen and the details like HOA and covenants are sometimes and issue beast thought out before the process goes too far.
@thebionicman My favorite Ron White?ÿ "I didn't know how many of them it would take to kick my ass but I knew how many they were going to use and that is some mighty important information."
Your localities do not have Certificates of Occupancies?
?ÿIt is possible, but it is not something that concerns me with boundary surveying.?ÿ And, I'm not about to move into one of those places or even purchase some kind of investment property there.?ÿ Give me land, lotsa land, lotsa a starry skies above..........................?ÿ I have owned city property.?ÿ Got rid of all of it once I learned the BS the City tries to lay on people for no valid reason.?ÿ Never will buy any again.?ÿ This falls in line with the discussion about HOA's.?ÿ I would never, under any circumstances, live in such a forsaken community.?ÿ It may be ideal for others because they don't need to worry about having me for a neighbor. (Cousin Eddie from Christmas Vacation)
I am a high desert(ish) resident too. No HOA's here, but I have delt with a few in other places. They can be nasty. In my private life I stay away.?ÿ
In some places I have worked, by law, all boundary changes have to be done by plat. If an HOA/covenents prohibit subdivision, the only role of the surveyor is to make sure their clients know about the restrictions. The local goverment will not enforce, or deny approval of a plat, because of any covenant or HOA restrictions that are more restrictive than the zoning and planning ordinances.?ÿ
The only recourses HOA memebers have to a subdivision or boundary change they don't like is to be nasty to the subdovider and/or sue them for damages. If the covenants are unambiguous (they usualy aren't) they will likely win in court, but the damages are usualy subjective, so are unpredictable.?ÿ
?ÿ
I've actually had to deal with this a couple of times in the recent past. Both times, the local government entity involved had us file two separate replats simultaneously, one for each lot in its respective subdivision. We included a note on both replats stating both lots and subdivisions involved and their recording info, and that the accompanying replat for the other lot involved was to be filed concurrently.
In many places there would be no need for two plats, that seems unnecessary, but I guess it depends on how records are localy organized and the text of the platring regulations.?ÿ?ÿ
@aliquot Their reasoning was they wanted both plats to be filed and locatable under the respective subdivision names.
Don't they have some sort of index? Or if not, couldn't thay just keep a copy in one of the files? In some places the two new lots would get a new subdivision name anyway. So that wouldnt be an issue.?ÿ
Not that this would have been worth arguing with them about. This is one of the, "just do what they want" situations. Its the surveyors job to worry about the integrity of the product. It is the goverment's job to worry about organizing and maintaining the records.?ÿ
@poorpdop that can be handled by indexing to both subdivisions.?ÿ Its done fairly frequently in our state.