Special Inspections

[conarb]

You guys don't give a damn what anything costs, remember it's the owners paying for the Special Inspections, not us builders that you take so much delight in screwing. I had an owner ask "Why so many layers of inspection?" as the bills came pouring in, I said some inspection has to be continuous like welding, and welding inspection requires welding certificates that city inspectors don't have, the Structural Engineer was standing there and stated: "In Europe all inspectors must have welding certificates". I guess the bottom line is that you want to require Special Inspections becasue your inspectors aren't either smart enough or trained to inspect these items, maybe it's time to get better inspectors, or maybe it's time to deduct the Special Inspection fees from the building department fees.

 

[classicT]

You guys don't give a damn what anything costs, remember it's the owners paying for the Special Inspections, not us builders that you take so much delight in screwing. I had an owner ask "Why so many layers of inspection?" as the bills came pouring in, I said some inspection has to be continuous like welding, and welding inspection requires welding certificates that city inspectors don't have, the Structural Engineer was standing there and stated: "In Europe all inspectors must have welding certificates". I guess the bottom line is that you want to require Special Inspections becasue your inspectors aren't either smart enough or trained to inspect these items, maybe it's time to get better inspectors, or maybe it's time to deduct the Special Inspection fees from the building department fees.

CONARB, your eternal pessimism on how Building Dept.'s work is astonishing.

Why is it always the building departments fault? The design team should be making the owner aware of the requirements from the vary beginning. And SI is not something all that new. Who is surprised when it is required?

It is simply one of the many costs associated with building.

 

[conarb]

CONARB, your eternal pessimism on how Building Dept.'s work is astonishing.

Why is it always the building departments fault? The design team should be making the owner aware of the requirements from the vary beginning. And SI is not something all that new. Who is surprised when it is required?

It is simply one of the many costs associated with building.

Ty:

Because I have perspective, building with no SI for $6 a square foot, seeing SI come into the codes in the 70s, now having my last owner pay close to $100,000 in SI fees, and BTW even affordable housing here is running $1,000 a square foot. Of course SI isn't the main reason, it's codes that have made building progressively more expensive, every little thing costs money, fire sprinklers was a huge thing but you guys could care less. Cities are already making huge grants to get affordable housing built, better that they eliminate permit fees than outright gifts of money. The last permit I applied for the permit tech punched my license number into his computer and exclaimed: "My God, you've been at this for over half a century, I've never seen a number this low." I just replied: "Yes, I've seen a lot."

 

[classicT]

Ty:

Because I have perspective, building with no SI for $6 a square foot, seeing SI come into the codes in the 70s, now having my last owner pay close to $100,000 in SI fees, and BTW even affordable housing here is running $1,000 a square foot. Of course SI isn't the main reason, it's codes that have made building progressively more expensive, every little thing costs money, fire sprinklers was a huge thing but you guys could care less. Cities are already making huge grants to get affordable housing built, better that they eliminate permit fees than outright gifts of money. The last permit I applied for the permit tech punched my license number into his computer and exclaimed: "My God, you've been at this for over half a century, I've never seen a number this low." I just replied: "Yes, I've seen a lot."

But again, your numbers only pertain to one area in the world. Your view is so biased based upon your limited understanding and constrained view of your locality only. $1000/sf will buy you a full on mansion in 90%+ of the US.

And you are such a pessimistic codger that I bet no one gives you any leeway or assistance because they dread working with you.

 

[conarb]

But again, your numbers only pertain to one area in the world. Your view is so biased based upon your limited understanding and constrained view of your locality only. $1000/sf will buy you a full on mansion in 90%+ of the US.

And you are such a pessimistic codger that I bet no one gives you any leeway or assistance because they dread working with you.

Ty:

So it's your position that codes should keep driving the cost of building up?

 

[tmurray]

Ty:

So it's your position that codes should keep driving the cost of building up?

My experience is that codes are driven by public demand. So if your question is if the public's demand of the level of service provided by the codes should increase the cost of the buildings they are paying for, my answer would be yes. Who am I as a government agent, or you for that matter, to tell the public they are wrong.

I recently had this conversation with an older contractor. Not that old, but he's in his sixties and has been building for the vast majority of his life. On the topic of cost of construction influenced by code changes, he said very little of his cost increases were due to code changes (he estimated %5). Material and labour costs had a greater impact, but he said the biggest impact was his clients. They just won't pick a nice middle of the road finish. It's top of the line or nothing for them. Then he told me; "I don't know why anyone complains about cost of construction increases from code changes. Everyone has to do it and the market has to adjust. If it can't, then some politician is not going to get re-elected because there was no growth and taxes will need to go up to offset that. Ultimately, the person replacing them is going to straighten it all out."

 

[classicT]

Ty:

So it's your position that codes should keep driving the cost of building up?

I'm of the opinion that the market will correct itself. At a certain cost, people will stop buying homes in your neck of the woods, and buy elsewhere.

A million dollar 1000sf dump in the bay area or a million dollar 5000sf lodge on 20acres in Montana. I know which one I'd take...

I get people have to follow the jobs, but telecommuting is on the rise. The markets that you are so passionate about are doomed to fail when a market correction occurs.

 

[Mark K]

Several comments

I agree that you can enforce provisions in referenced standards but when provisions in reference standards are inconsistent or in conflict with adopted code they control. The special inspection provisions were not developed with being a general system that could be referenced from any reference standard.

The term approved needs to be narrowly interpreted to mean approved based on compliance with the provisions in the building code. Approval cannot be based on additional requirements. The building department provides a ministerial function and in general is not discretionary. Sections 104.10 and 104.11 apply in limited circumstances.

There is no problem with design professional imposing additional requirements but the building official as a regulator is more limited in what can be done.

 

[ADAguy]

Return to Hammurabbi? It fails and kills or injuries, are you willing to give your life for mistakes or cutting corners?

 

[conarb]

Return to Hammurabbi? It fails and kills or injuries, are you willing to give your life for mistakes or cutting corners?

How did we get by without Special Inspection until the 70s, then SI-s for 4 items until the 90s, then 15 items, and now you want to add more? Can't you guys inspect fire stopping? Why were older inspectors willing and able to inspect it?

When I was driving today I heard the President on the radio bragging to farm groups about all the ridiculous regulations he has removed, he has removed zero regulations from the construction industry, because of the corrupt ICC.

 

[tmurray]

How did we get by without Special Inspection until the 70s, then SI-s for 4 items until the 90s, then 15 items, and now you want to add more? Can't you guys inspect fire stopping? Why were older inspectors willing and able to inspect it?

When I was driving today I heard the President on the radio bragging to farm groups about all the ridiculous regulations he has removed, he has removed zero regulations from the construction industry, because of the corrupt ICC.

Is it a new requirement or is it an older one that is just now being enforced more consistently?
Did we "get by" without them? It would be interesting to see if diligent inspection of fire stopping results in fewer fires spreading from one fire compartment to another.

Your "facts" appear to be based on opinion.

 

[classicT]

How did we get by without Special Inspection until the 70s, then SI-s for 4 items until the 90s, then 15 items, and now you want to add more? Can't you guys inspect fire stopping? Why were older inspectors willing and able to inspect it?

When I was driving today I heard the President on the radio bragging to farm groups about all the ridiculous regulations he has removed, he has removed zero regulations from the construction industry, because of the corrupt ICC.

I agree with tmurray, everything you share is presented as fact when it is more of an opinion.

Great tragedies have led to advances in understanding of building performance and science, perhaps most so in fire containment, suppression and prevention. Firestopping has become an extremely important factor. During the 70-80's, when firestopping was a new market, several significant fires resulted in loss of life because these systems were not properly in place.

Take a look into the MGM Grand Hotel Fire (1980) and the First Interstate Tower Fire (1988).

Meanwhile, building departments are being asked to do more and more with less staff. When there is insufficient time to cover what we have already, how do we take on SI of firestopping. Items requiring continuous inspection will most often be taken care of by SI. Building departments often lack staffing to be a sites per the contractors whim and convenience.

 

[ICE]

Most projects that rely on firestopping don't get the attention to detail that they should. I have to pin down the architect to specify the method....of which, there are many. Then the contractor whips out the Hilti caulk and goes to town. When I tell them that they did a good thing wrong they get upset. I am all for SI on large projects.

 

[conarb]

I agree with tmurray, everything you share is presented as fact when it is more of an opinion.

What are you talking about, my recollections of when SI-s came into the codes and how they have expanded over the years? I remember it, if you doubt it look it up.

Great tragedies have led to advances in understanding of building performance and science, perhaps most so in fire containment, suppression and prevention. Firestopping has become an extremely important factor. During the 70-80's, when firestopping was a new market, several significant fires resulted in loss of life because these systems were not properly in place.

Take a look into the MGM Grand Hotel Fire (1980) and the First Interstate Tower Fire (1988).

As I recall both of those fires were due to the usage of styrofoam on the exteriors of buildings, styrofoam has no place in any construction, if the ES Reports havn't allowed it the fires wouldn't have raced through the cladding, I doubt that they had anything to do with fire stopping, I do not have a problem with fire stopping, how did you guys inspect it before? In fact I don't think any AHJ I know is requiring it now.

Meanwhile, building departments are being asked to do more and more with less staff. When there is insufficient time to cover what we have already, how do we take on SI of firestopping. Items requiring continuous inspection will most often be taken care of by SI. Building departments often lack staffing to be a sites per the contractors whim and convenience.

Yeah we know, give us more money so we can hire more people and we'll do more, just drive the costs higher and higher until everyone is living on the streets.

 

[classicT]

What are you talking about, my recollections of when SI-s came into the codes and how they have expanded over the years? I remember it, if you doubt it look it up.



As I recall both of those fires were due to the usage of styrofoam on the exteriors of buildings, styrofoam has no place in any construction, if the ES Reports havn't allowed it the fires wouldn't have raced through the cladding, I doubt that they had anything to do with fire stopping, I do not have a problem with fire stopping, how did you guys inspect it before? In fact I don't think any AHJ I know is requiring it now.



Yeah we know, give us more money so we can hire more people and we'll do more, just drive the costs higher and higher until everyone is living on the streets.

I know when I am talking to a brick wall... continuing to do so will only make us both look like JA's.

 

[Paul Sweet]

Special inspections got started after the Kansas City hotel balcony collapse in the late 1980s. They were started for unusual structural systems that municipal inspectors didn't have the expertise to know if a detail was correct. Since then they have expanded exponentially. I budget 2% of construction cost for special inspections on new college buildings, more in remote areas where a special inspector has to travel 100 or more miles for a 2 hour inspection or to take cylinders back to the lab. Continuous third party inspections are now required for what a architect or clerk of the works used to be able to observe intermittently

 

[conarb]

Special inspections got started after the Kansas City hotel balcony collapse in the late 1980s. They were started for unusual structural systems that municipal inspectors didn't have the expertise to know if a detail was correct. Since then they have expanded exponentially. I budget 2% of construction cost for special inspections on new college buildings, more in remote areas where a special inspector has to travel 100 or more miles for a 2 hour inspection or to take cylinders back to the lab. Continuous third party inspections are now required for what a architect or clerk of the works used to be able to observe intermittently

Paul:

Where do you see this going, continuous Special Inspectors for everything, no need for city inspectors any more then?

 

[tmurray]

Paul:

Where do you see this going, continuous Special Inspectors for everything, no need for city inspectors any more then?

Do you really think it would be cheaper for the municipality to do this inspection? Keep in mind they are not doing it now, so you are not paying them for it. They aren't going to do it for free.

The way I see it, special inspections are a way to help keep costs lower.

If municipalities have to employ more staff, permit prices go up.
If municipalities have to employ more qualified staff, permit prices go up.

 

[conarb]

Do you really think it would be cheaper for the municipality to do this inspection? Keep in mind they are not doing it now, so you are not paying them for it. They aren't going to do it for free.

The way I see it, special inspections are a way to help keep costs lower.

If municipalities have to employ more staff, permit prices go up.
If municipalities have to employ more qualified staff, permit prices go up.

They are doing it now, I've never had fire stopping inspected by a SI, in the past I've had municipal inspectors inspect piers and epoxy bolting before SIs, even welding years ago.

Building Departments should stop diverting their permit fees to other departments and incorporating other departments into the profitable building departments.

 

[my250r11]

Fire partitions, Barrier, ETC., with proper firestopping work to contain or slow the fire just like keeping doors closed do. Seen it several times. If not done correctly people die. Also these type of separations give builders & owners opinions instead of just requiring sprinklers for everything which is also something you conard also bi!!h about. EVERYTHING cost more, that is just a fact, from fuel to toilet paper. Glad that not all people opinions are so self centered as yours.

 

[Mark K]

For the record I have a 1967 UBC (Section 305) that has provisions for special inspections.

 

[conarb]

For the record I have a 1967 UBC (Section 305) that has provisions for special inspections.

Mark:

What does Chapter 17 say, does it list the items requiring Special Inspection?

 

[Mark K]

When the regional codes transitioned to the IBC the chapter numbering changed so chapter 17 in the 1967 UBC did not address special inspections. The required special inspections were listed in Section 305. As I recall there were about 4 or 5 special inspections at that time.

 

[jar546]

........
Building Departments should stop diverting their permit fees to other departments and incorporating other departments into the profitable building departments.

Agree 100% but the problem is not the building departments, it is the governing bodies of the municipalities that look at the building department as a revenue stream for their general funds when, in fact, it is actually illegal to do so. Building department fees are to be based on the actual expenses to run the department. It is OK for the Building Department to have a little extra to build up for an emergency fund, but the additional revenue generated that goes to the municipality's general fund is just wrong.