• 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

Contractors and Compliance: The Crucial Role of Detailed Construction Drawings and Documents

In the world of construction, the landscape is constantly shifting, presenting challenges that demand our attention and innovation. As a seasoned Building Official, I've witnessed the evolution of these challenges over the past 12 years, and it's clear that comprehensive construction drawings and documents are more critical than ever. In this article, we'll explore the multifaceted issues surrounding the need for detailed plans and how they intersect with contractor competency, overloaded inspectors, plan examiners, and recent legislative changes.

Contractor Competency and Code Knowledge:

One of the foremost issues we face today is the competency of contractors, particularly in smaller commercial projects. We're dealing with contractors who may lack the experience, knowledge, or commitment required for the complexities of commercial work. This challenge is exacerbated by projects involving ADA and other nuanced code compliance.

Imagine this scenario: A contractor claims they don't need to install ADA signage because it's not explicitly on the plans. Such excuses are unacceptable, and this situation underscores the urgency of having all necessary information clearly laid out. It's essential that drawings include specific details on ADA requirements, leaving no room for interpretation. As Building Officials, we must emphasize the importance of adhering to accessibility standards, even for contractors who may be out of their depth in commercial projects.

Overloaded Inspectors and the Need for Clarity:

Inspectors are the guardians of code compliance on construction sites. However, labor shortages have burdened them with excessive inspections, leaving them limited time to decipher ambiguous or incomplete drawings in the field. Their time is precious, and they should not be burdened with tasks that should have been resolved during the design and planning phase.

This underscores the critical role of detailed construction drawings. When plans provide explicit instructions, inspectors can focus on verifying that the work aligns with the approved designs rather than having to interpret vague statements or refer to the code book for specifics.

The Role of Plans Examiners and Legislative Impact:

Plans Examiners are the gatekeepers of construction plans' compliance with building codes and regulations. Their ability to do their job effectively relies heavily on the quality and comprehensiveness of the plans they review. However, legislation in states like Florida has limited their access to contracts, which are often crucial for understanding the full scope of the project.

This legislation highlights the importance of having comprehensive and unambiguous construction drawings. Architects and engineers must recognize the responsibility they bear in ensuring that their plans leave no room for uncertainty. Clear and detailed drawings become even more crucial in states where the contract cannot be used as a reference.

Collaboration for Success:

To address these challenges, collaboration among all stakeholders is paramount. Architects, Engineers, Plans Examiners, and Building Officials must work together effectively. Architects and Engineers should take the lead in providing detailed plans that leave no room for ambiguity. Plans Examiners can provide valuable feedback to designers, helping them understand the specific requirements and expectations of the permitting process.

Building Officials can play a pivotal role in fostering this collaboration, acting as facilitators between plan examiners, architects, and engineers. Encouraging open communication and clarity in construction documents is essential to ensure that projects proceed smoothly from design to completion.

The construction industry is in a state of flux, and these challenges require our collective attention and effort. Detailed plans are the cornerstone of successful projects, offering clarity and compliance while addressing the rise of inexperienced or incompetent contractors. Legislative changes may pose hurdles, but with effective collaboration and an unwavering commitment to precision, we can navigate this changing landscape and continue to build a safer and more efficient future for construction.
 
Last edited:
If no code section is provided are there any ramifications for the inspector or plan checker?

I can only speak for my state. If a property owner feels a notice of violation is in error they have three levels of appeal, the last of which is the state court system. If an appeal reaches the court and there isn't an actual citation of a specific section of code that the condition allegedly violates, the judge will dismiss the case. Everyone will have wasted considerable time, effort, and money. The individual plan checker or inspector is indemnified against personal liability, but the municipality he/she works for can be sued.

Municipal executives don't like to have to defend against lawsuits, especially lawsuits they are almost guaranteed to lose. It won't take many cases like that before the plan checker or inspector gets called on the carpet -- or perhaps just fired for malfeasance. But this state is perhaps a special case, because we have received the annual training seminars that remind us that we MUST cite a code section when writing up a violation. If a newbie plan checker or inspector isn't aware of that -- their boss hasn't been doing his/her job in explaining what's required of the position.
 
I hear from various locales that state it is a legal requirement there… well guess what, it’s likely a legal requirement everywhere. Now that we agree on something, let’s delve into the implementation rate. If I were all for it, I’d have to admit to abject failure.
 
The building department should focus on code compliance. If the construction documents do not comply with the code the building department should say so.

If the building department attempts to solve all the problems it will only frustrate all involved.

As the code regulates most things in a building.....Generally these statements oppose one another....

Example:
I assisted one of my assistants on a plan review and caught a 1 hour exit enclosure built up against an existing wall that could not be constructed in the field...NOT A CODE ISSUE....Against my guidance, the assistant did not make a big deal out of it on plan review and issued the permit. It took about 2 months in the field to rectify the situation once the wall was framed and an inspection called for...

I love helping people.....Whether they like it or not....
 
As the code regulates most things in a building.....Generally these statements oppose one another....

Example:
I assisted one of my assistants on a plan review and caught a 1 hour exit enclosure built up against an existing wall that could not be constructed in the field...NOT A CODE ISSUE....Against my guidance, the assistant did not make a big deal out of it on plan review and issued the permit. It took about 2 months in the field to rectify the situation once the wall was framed and an inspection called for...

I love helping people.....Whether they like it or not....
The vast majority of my plan review comments cite code. If there is a violation of a code, I cite it. Some are not violations of a specific code, rather a comment asking for more information, but even those usually fall back on 107.2.1. Sometimes, but rarely I run into similar situations. I seem to remember one where the designer proposed erecting back to back fire rated wall assemblies (I don't remember the specifics), both of which required gypsum panels screwed to the framing on both sides of each separate wall. I asked for clarification. The designer called me and asked what clarification I needed. I explained that while the assembly may meet code on paper, it would be awfully hard to erect, and that I would expect problems and delays. He thanked me and found an assembly better suited for the need. Some would say I over extended my responsibility. He didn't.
 
I totally get where you're coming from, and it sounds really frustrating. Dealing with building inspections can be a real headache, especially when it feels like they're nitpicking over small stuff instead of focusing on what really matters. It's annoying when you're trying to do things right, but keep running into rules that don't seem to make sense. Your story really shows how tricky and unfair it can feel sometimes, especially with all those different rules in different places. It's clear something needs to change so that inspections are more about making sure everything's safe and well done, rather than just finding problems. Thanks for sharing your experience; it's an important reminder of how complicated these rules can get.

The building code(s) represent the "minimum" standard for what constitutes a safe building. You complain about inspectors nitpicking over small stuff but the fact is, if it's in the code, pointing out failures to comply with the code is their job. It's ALL in the code -- it is not the job of the inspectors in the field to make ad hoc decisions about which code sections are important and which they can overlook. If they overlook anything (intentionally) they are committing malfeasance.

Also please remember that, legally, whether or not a plan reviewer or an inspector catches a non-compliant condition it is still the legal responsibility of the owner to provide construction that complies with the codes. Not some of the codes, not just the parts of the code they feel like complying with -- ALL of the codes. Including the nitpicky small stuff.
 
There is a lot of stuff in the building codes, especially the Energy code, that doesn't make the building any safer.
 
Top