I don't think special or "hi-res" aerial is needed to find your unpermitted structure in the first place. Maybe to accurately assess value, but I'd argue a in person or simple drone flyover would be more effective in this regard.
It was made very clear to me recently. The google maps aerial imagery updated in my neighborhood for the first time in....5-6 years. Something like that. Suddenly, every little shack, shanty, cabin, etc I was aware of in the neighborhood appeared. A simple comparison between the new aerial and the tax information was all that was needed to asses the situation down to:
1. Empty lot
2. Permitted
3. Unpermitted, not tax assessed
4. Unpermitted, tax assessed
I actually did something crazy, I TOLD the county I had put up a unpermitted structure as a accessory building, and even gave them a estimate of the value. They happily took my assessment at face value (it WAS truthful, btw), put it down on my tax assessment, and gladly took the extra money. This was a gamble to avoid anyone "coming after me," at least from the tax side. I know I'm still vulnerable from the "permit people" but I think I may end up a bit further down the line as I'm paying taxes (extortion?) on it.
So if the project is build to code and the inpsector is happy, why does it have to be done by a licensed guy?
Agreed, 100%. This requirement always struck me as some sort of preservation of the boys club. Why are they trusting me, the owner builder, to build the walls and the roof over my head, then tell me I can't be trusted to run wires and pipes? Let the owner-builder, build, then assess the result to the code as usual.
Just like in your case on Oahu, classic. You do all the work, then you have to scratch somebody's back because they have the license, THEN the inspector (re)checks it. Many stories I have heard of license holders essentially charging people cash for them to swing by and scribble their signature, sometimes they don't even look at the work they are signing off on. Again, rumors, but I'll safely assume at least a small minority of license holders do this, at least on occasion, and definitely for friends and family.
It was made very clear to me recently. The google maps aerial imagery updated in my neighborhood for the first time in....5-6 years. Something like that. Suddenly, every little shack, shanty, cabin, etc I was aware of in the neighborhood appeared. A simple comparison between the new aerial and the tax information was all that was needed to asses the situation down to:
1. Empty lot
2. Permitted
3. Unpermitted, not tax assessed
4. Unpermitted, tax assessed
I actually did something crazy, I TOLD the county I had put up a unpermitted structure as a accessory building, and even gave them a estimate of the value. They happily took my assessment at face value (it WAS truthful, btw), put it down on my tax assessment, and gladly took the extra money. This was a gamble to avoid anyone "coming after me," at least from the tax side. I know I'm still vulnerable from the "permit people" but I think I may end up a bit further down the line as I'm paying taxes (extortion?) on it.
So if the project is build to code and the inpsector is happy, why does it have to be done by a licensed guy?
Agreed, 100%. This requirement always struck me as some sort of preservation of the boys club. Why are they trusting me, the owner builder, to build the walls and the roof over my head, then tell me I can't be trusted to run wires and pipes? Let the owner-builder, build, then assess the result to the code as usual.
Just like in your case on Oahu, classic. You do all the work, then you have to scratch somebody's back because they have the license, THEN the inspector (re)checks it. Many stories I have heard of license holders essentially charging people cash for them to swing by and scribble their signature, sometimes they don't even look at the work they are signing off on. Again, rumors, but I'll safely assume at least a small minority of license holders do this, at least on occasion, and definitely for friends and family.