• 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

ICE said:
It is difficult to believe that a licensed contractor did this.There was a wall. It was a bearing wall supporting ceiling joists from two rooms.



There is now a pair of 2"x8" sitting on top of the spot where there was a wall.





The kickers are attached to the ceiling joist. The purlin brace might be all that holds up the 2"x8"s.

About half of a messed up furnace install is sitting on the joists.
Click to expand...
At least he was smart enough to know there should be a beam there. Right idea, ****-poor execution.
 
\ said:
There's quite a bit of work here. It looks pretty good. It's too damned bad that it has to come out. You see, they didn't see the detail that shows the footing 24" into undisturbed soul. So they are 16' to 18" deep.I have encountered this hundreds of times. Yes I said hundreds. It is because the detail is small and the writing is tiny and the info is nowhere else on the plans. Hell, sometimes I have to search for it. I have asked that there be a big warning on the foundation page. Apparently that would be too much trouble, but doing all of this work over is no big deal.
Click to expand...
You know what gets me about your pictures Tiger is that we are both in California, since the advent of the 1998 CBC we can't get a building department to approve anything without an engineer's stamp, all engineers want drilled pier and grade beam foundations, those piers go down a minimum of 5'. About that time I had to build an addition on a home and as usual the engineer designed a pier and grade beam foundation, I went to him making the argument that since the house was a "T Foundation" the addition should be the same because of differential settlement, I lost the argument because the engineer maintained that the T foundation under the home had been there for over 30 years and was done settling, you don't want to use a T under the addition since it will settle.

Just do as they do here and demand an engineer's stamp, arguing that they always pull the code sections R301.1.3 and R301.1.3.3.1, and anything other than a square box they call irregular. You're just too easy.
 
Maybe there's a steel fletch plate sandwiched between the 2x's...nah..I don't thank so.

Stand on it and jump up and down, maybe they crowned the beam and there's no deflection?? He..He...He ;)

Does Simpson make #5 sky hooks anymore?
 
ICE said:
Retrofit windows in a new framed wall. I will be hearing from the office manager. There were no plans available and I didn't do the framing inspection so I'm not sure about the entire wall being an opening.23142033772_c76c4089c5_b.jpg
Click to expand...
Ok then. New construction windows were installed. Trouble is they've only ever installed retrofit windows and have never done lath before now. The guy that is the boss is a Dandy. He makes it sound like he's been in business forever.

23110325439_81c7490da7_b.jpg

23452305966_91c7b7f7c3_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
23183173130_63905e1727_b.jpg

Sometimes I just don't want to say no.

But they force me.

23478950695_7afdaa8501_o.jpg
 
Last edited:
Screw missing or the bundling of wires?

Is the spare allowed to be taped off or do you require wire nuts?

Pretty
 
Pcinspector1 said:
Screw missing or the bundling of wires?Is the spare allowed to be taped off or do you require wire nuts?

Pretty
Click to expand...
Mounted over a hole in the exterior wall.
 
ooooh! yes that is a problem, apparently the old panel was smaller and recessed in the wall, your good at this, I don't care what that kilt wearing straw boss sez about you!

Still it's pretty work, maybe you can work with him and turn him into a prodigy!
 
I was convinced that there is a re-roof in progress......the owner says not so and I am welcome to go on the roof to see for myself.

22876399624_befaed85ab_h.jpg

And yes Pc1, there is some HVAC work being done by an amigo in chaps.
 
Last edited:
MASSDRIVER said:
is that because the neutral is connected to ground?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what's up. This happened one other time with a roof mounted condenser. It has never happened with a ground mounted condenser. It might be a false reading. The last time that it happened I had the installer, who was no slouch, check it out front to back. I was there and nothing was found wrong.

I recall that somebody commented that since I am not standing on Earth, the tester is not reliable. Somebody also mentioned capacitance causing the alert. If I knew what that was it might make a difference but I haven't found the time to study and understand it.

The last time was with a different brand tester and I had to touch the metal with the tester to get it to signal. This time the tester is singing inches away from the metal.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The service drop was laying on the roof so they propped it up.

23514888671_a0ab46c581_b.jpg

The roof pitch is 7/8" so the last roof was a hot mop. That roofer didn't prop the drop before throwing hot tar. It's hard to know what that did to the insulation.

23488730752_908a627efd_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
Edison tells me that 2' above the roof is all that's required. The conduit isn't long enough for that and trying to shorten the drop wil be a hard thing to pull off without bending the conduit. The planner that I talked to said that they would replace the drop because of the tar and see what they can do about raising it.
 
Wouldn't it be the HO's responsibility to provide a method for raising it at the roofline instead of the Power Company's? That's certainly how it works most places.
 
Edison owns the drop. Edison will give the owner a correction notice. Edison may choose to bring the drop in from another direction. However it turns out, it's not my problem. Perhaps I shouldn't have said anything about it.
 
POST #1813,

I can't find where 2-ft above the roof is allowed by the NEC. POCO has its own rules?

I see NEC 230.24 clearances (A) No. 3 (Not more than 6-ft of conductor should be allowed over the roof if flat.) Photo taken looks beyond 6-ft IMO.

It appears that the service was from another direction at one time, and may have been compliant?
 
It's going to be fun putting those tiles back in. I hope that fan is well supported. Do the troffers have secondary support wires, or are they clipped to the grid?
 
Paul Sweet said:
It's going to be fun putting those tiles back in. I hope that fan is well supported. Do the troffers have secondary support wires, or are they clipped to the grid?
Click to expand...
The fan is hung off of the flex duct...It's a seismic thing.... :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top