• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

An average day

Here's another example from yesterday. The owner is wealthy in the high billions.

The first inspection resulted in no inspection for the obvious reason.

39800152921_11401c30e3_o.jpg

The next time out, they have fixed the obvious.
Take a look at the work.

39090269924_cebcd17455_o.jpg

39800153801_553d7ee311_o.jpg

This is from the approved set of plans.

39090265074_826af5071f_o.jpg

It is mislabeled as a tank anchorage. The footing shall be 12" into undisturbed soil. The re-bar shall be 3" away from soil. On this page the wall is maxed out at 9'6". Another page has 10"2". I doubt that 8" is a big deal....it's sloppy.

The footing is 12" deep from the middle of the slab on one side and 0" deep on the other side. The re-bar is supported on the wrong bar.
 
Last edited:
But is it worth it if "the common people" are living on the streets? When we came here in the late 30s we had codes but nobody bothered with them, the "Oakies" showed up, homesteaded land and built tar paper shacks, everybody survived and had a roof over their heads, there was a time when codes were good, but now we have Green Codes, Energy Codes, and disability codes that do no good at all, all they do is prommote the New World Order agenda and make things too expensive for anyone but the wealthy. In San Francisco and even Oakland they are building high-rises, cranes all over the place, the higher up you go the more expensive the units are, meanwhile on the streets below you have to stumble over drunks and druggies.

Berkeley inspectors have to stumble through this to go to work in the monring.
 
The job is a large room addition. The hole in the floor is a sewer cleanout. It is inside the front entry.

25011683027_2c7e14e74b_b.jpg

The contractor stated that an inspector required the cleanout when inspecting the under-slab plumbing. That seems like a lousy excuse.

25011682737_4df0abe424_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
A licensed contractor did this el. service upgrade for a solar contractor. We won't let a solar contractor install a service upgrade because they are not qualified. So they hire the contractor with the lowest bid. I can't fault them for that.

38985306335_a21c6896b1_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
ICE said:
The job is a large room addition. The hole in the floor is a sewer cleanout. It is inside the front entry.



The contractor stated that an inspector required the cleanout when inspecting the under-slab plumbing. That seems like a lousy excuse.
Click to expand...
Atleast they won't have any trouble finding it when they need it!
 
mtlogcabin said:
The plans also indicate 4 rebar in the footing and the picture only shows 3
Click to expand...

The plans call for a #4 on each side. The rebar in the middle is an extra on the drawing. Looking at the rebar in the wall there is supposed to be a horizontal rebar every 32” but the drawing places rebar about 12” apart.
 
ICE,
On the "day tank anchorage" detail (CMU wall), do you ever inspect the keyway between the foundation and the wall? Having the keyway is more work for the contractor. With #5 @ 24" vert passing through the joint, the keyway is probably a waste of time. But, it is shown on the approved plans. Is the keyway dimensioned on a typical detail or note?
 
Phil said:
ICE,
On the "day tank anchorage" detail (CMU wall), do you ever inspect the keyway between the foundation and the wall? Having the keyway is more work for the contractor. With #5 @ 24" vert passing through the joint, the keyway is probably a waste of time. But, it is shown on the approved plans. Is the keyway dimensioned on a typical detail or note?
Click to expand...

I asked for printed pictures of the keyway and allowed them to erect 4’ of wall before the next inspection. The #5 rebar are spaced 16” apart. There is no dimension for the keyway. They will use a 2”x4” block.
 
Last edited:
I have come across this several times in the last month.

28299730989_e1c942eb72_b.jpg

It can't be used with armor protection for the GEC.

28299731739_50752ca116_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
40050441312_796a7dff6a_b.jpg\\

39184529325_6ac51fb45f_b.jpg

40050769682_b8c3cbf8fc_b.jpg


Many of the screws managed to cut all the way through the vinyl. I'm not so sure that my explanation of window flashing got through to them.
 
Last edited:
Wow, they used a screw designed to go through cement board and were surprised when it tore that soft vinyl the shreds? Who'd have thought?
 
39606070744_ffa6d8c6d3_b.jpg

39606069614_b51321a354_b.jpg

What do you do when you encounter such a lame, stupid, dangerous condition? Me? Well I do what you probably wouldn't.
 
Last edited:
TI of a fast food restaurant. There was no plan to replace any duct.

26445261348_d8ba673a88_b.jpg

I had a duct removed from a plenum.

26445262628_866bf510dc_b.jpg

I gave them options. They could obtain a permit to replace everything or I would ask the Health Dept. to have a look. They got the permit. I am flabbergasted that I had to influence the decision.
 
Last edited:
I was there to inspect the sheathing for a re-roof. I went to the back yard to see another building that was not mentioned on the permit and found all of the solar array equipment. Had I not gone to the back yard, I might not have been aware that solar was removed. The roofers told me that the company that they work for re-installs solar quite often. Apparently without permit or inspection.

26445260278_7cd44471c7_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
Upon entering the bedroom you first notice the low ceiling. It stretches for two thirds of the room and the rest is a high vaulted ceiling.

39424456445_ffd638f3d1_b.jpg

It is a floor/ceiling for a loft.

38513025450_d6488fc16e_b.jpg

The access is through the closet.

38513026500_d7afc2eeb2_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
I have said no to cloth web used to support flexible duct because it tends to fold and become narrower than the 1.5" wide as required by code. Now a contractor has asked the office manager for a code section to back that up. The manager has asked me to find that. I replied that there is only the 1.5" wide code. This material fails, which the picture documents. Actual real world evidence is not good enough to satisfy the contractor and or manager. I am now asked to research the listing (if it exists) for the cloth web and the duct in an effort to find an approval or prohibition for use of the cloth web.

My take on this is that any approval is moot because the stuff fails to perform. I have found the failure dozens of times. Every other time, all of the web was replaced without hesitation. So I will give the manager another shot at the picture and tell him to make up my mind for me.

40277342642_1e8c77b3f5_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top