• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Pass Code or Not?

If the contractor wants to tear something out that is non-conforming and rebuild it per the approved drawings I do not see why the engineer needs to be asked if it was ok to build it per the approved drawings. The owner and the design professionals should be made aware of the problem so they can more closely monitor the contractor. The owner should try to understand the cause of the problem in part to understand whether the contractor may make a claim to be reimbursed because he believes somebody else was the cause of the problem.
 
If the contractor wants to tear something out that is non-conforming and rebuild it per the approved drawings I do not see why the engineer needs to be asked if it was ok to build it per the approved drawings. The owner and the design professionals should be made aware of the problem so they can more closely monitor the contractor. The owner should try to understand the cause of the problem in part to understand whether the contractor may make a claim to be reimbursed because he believes somebody else was the cause of the problem.
Click to expand...
It's a tract. There is no "owner" yet. It belongs solely to the developer. They may do as they see fit. Technically the prospective home buyer isn't allowed in the building area. But in general they don't care about those rules.

Brent.
 
@ ~ @ ~ @

Anyone, ...which Code section or sections are being referenced to

say this is not compliant ?

I need Code man !......Give me the Code !! :cool:

@ ~ @ ~ @
 
I was always taught that columns and posts should always bear in the center third of the wall or pier, otherwise they would induce tension into the wall or pier. With all the verbiage the code has on beams, joists, rafters, trusses, and every other structural item, I can't believe something so basic isn't in there!
 
Closest thing I could find..... lateral displacement is not defined by the code, thus I would defer to the manufacture's listing and installation guideline - @ inch diagram thingy somebody posted. The lateral displacement is being prevented by a post anchor system that is listed.

R407.3 Structural requirements.

The columns shall be restrained to prevent lateral displacement at the bottom end. Wood columns shall not be less in nominal size than 4 inches by 4 inches (102 mm by 102 mm). Steel columns shall not be less than 3-inch-diameter (76 mm) Schedule 40 pipe manufactured in accordance with ASTM A 53 Grade B or approved equivalent.

Blowing smoke, but it may be the only thing to prevent this ......from passing.
 
Doesn't comply with approved drawings:

R106.4 Amended construction documents. Work shall be installed in accordance with the approved construction documents, and any changes made during construction that are not in compliance with the approved construction documents shall be resubmitted for approval as an amended set of construction documents.

Doesn't meet manufactures spec. for post anchor:

R106.1.2 Manufacturer's installation instructions. Manufacturer's installation instructions, as required by this code, shall be available on the job site at the time of inspection.

R502.9 Fastening. Floor framing shall be nailed in accordance with Table R602.3(1). Where posts and beam or girder construction is used to support floor framing, positive connections shall be provided to ensure against uplift and lateral displacement.

R501.2 Requirements. Floor construction shall be capable of accommodating all loads according to Section R301 and of transmitting the resulting loads to the supporting structural elements.

The industry in general assumes centered. If not it should be design. If you Read thru sec. 3 it says that in a round about code way lol. Of course these code sections only apply if your satae hasn't amended them.
 
I doubt seriously if anyone is even attempting to pass it off. Somewhere on the drawings it told the concrete guy to put them there, or they laid it out wrong. Since that contractor is probably off that release, they will wait and schedule the correction. It's probably not the only one. Like I said, it's in process.

What happens is a prospective buyer goes nosing around where they aren't supposed to be, then starts trolling sites like this to build whatever case they think they might have. Or they hire a home inspector, which as a superintendent you don't even allow on the jobsite. They are allowed to inspect after final, and that's it.

So one day a pickup guy will go shore it up, a bobcat will arrive and tear it out, it will get formed and 5 dudes will repour and finish it. Like I say, it's a mistake, everyone moves forward as much as possible, the concrete guy whines, it gets fixed.

It is not uncommon, especially if it's the first release.

Brent.
 
The requirement that the post be placed in the center third of the footing is not in the code. It had some validity when we designed based on working stress 30 plus years ago but even then it was not necessarily an absolute.

My sense is that any prospective buyer can get access for his inspector from the people trying to sell the units. This should be even easier after they had agreed to buy the unit. Depending on the concern I would recommend hiring an engineer or architect to look at the work instead of a home inspector.
 
Why should the Buyer hire an Architect or Engineer? The buyer should first exhaust all avenues, contact the builder and if not reasonable explanation/fix or per plan then contact building department. The buyer immediately hiring his/her own design professional may well light a pissing fire contest and unnecessary costs to the buyer when a bit of leg work may bring about resolution.
 
mark handler said:
It clearly does not meet code and the manufacturers icc listing.the inspector should do his/her job and wwrite a correction.

2012 IBC 2304.9.7 Framing requirements.

Wood columns and posts shall be framed to provide full end bearing.
Click to expand...
I am in contact with the inspection office and will let you all know the outcome. The builder said it passed code which is why i even brought this up in this forum in the first place. Thank you for the IBC code it will make it easier to point it out to the inspector.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
$ @ $ @ $

Cory,

If you have enjoyed your visit and experience here, and have obtained

information to assist you, ...would you also consider becoming a "paid

subscription member" to this GREAT resource [ i.e. - A Sawhorse ] ?

We need "paid subscription members" to help support this Forum, so

that we all can assist others.

Thanks for your consideration ! :cool:

@ $ @ $ @
 
Discussion with inspector summary-- It will pass framing final. It will not pass third party foundation inspection. They need a letter from engineer telling them that this will get fixed and how, with signature before they will allow this house to move forward.Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Not sure why it would 'pass framing final', but at least they are going to insure corrections... Good luck with it. (would love to see more photos when fix is complete BTW)
 
% = = = %That's not necessarily true...........He \ she might have if they had looked at,

or even reviewed the construction plans !

% = = = %
Click to expand...
Had I been the inspector I might have pulled a tape to see how far the footings are from the building....and maybe not. What I am interested in is the size/depth of the footing and the steel. I would not be checking the layout beyond noting that there are three of them....just like the plans indicate.

When I got to see this I would say, "Oh you guys screwed ol' Shep on this one".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not sure why it would 'pass framing final', but at least they are going to insure corrections... Good luck with it. (would love to see more photos when fix is complete BTW)
Click to expand...
Agreed. Generally, I think it's common courtesy to point out potential problems as soon as possible to make the repair as cost effective as possible. Yes, many times contractors will tell me they know about the problem and a fix is in the works, which is probably the best case scenario. I guess there are plenty of jurisdictions that wait for a problem to become a catastrophe before addressing it.
 
This is getting better. Who are "they"? Is that the third party,or the inspector saying it will pass inspection once an engineer gets ahold of it? It's sounds like the bo is saying "yes, it will final, once it's fixed".

Something smells fishy in Denmark.

It can't even be finished as is. If inspection goes anything like ours, that house has had a framing inspection, as well as shear, plumbing, electrical, plumbing and rough mechanical.

As for the foundation, the inspector typically runs a tape to the property pin, tape to sidewalk, hold down spacing between anchors, and all the other concrete related stuff. Inspectors are there for code compliance, not dimension control. Multiple inspections per day, time constraints. Do you guys check for square and level? :)

Brent.
 
Simpson should start designing a new cantilevered post anchor!

Is the footing covered with styrofoam with a concrete skim coat applied, if so bearing is less that assumed!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top