• 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

does this make sense

ICE

ICE

Oh Well
Joined
Jun 23, 2011
Messages
12,910
Location
California
The claim is that a CASp required this. It was done on a weekend with the CASp and the contractor at the site.

Resized_Resized_20211104_121236001.jpeg
 
What in the....?

That's a new one.

Are they worried the cars will pull up and over the car-stops and park on the sidewalk in the covered patio area? Someone needs some common sense beat into them.
 
Since they were going to extremes, why didn't they bump out the stripes at the door to provide required maneuvering space?
 
I would like to know the paragraph referenced by the casp person. And it looks like the section in the foreground flares wider than the main part.
 
I just stumbled across this and immediately recognized it. As the CASp inspector who was called out AFTER the work was done, I can guarantee you the CASp inspector (me) wasn't there when the property owner decided this was a good idea. I was as amazed as you are, and in fact there are some compliance issues that were created by doing this.
 
ProCASp said:
I just stumbled across this and immediately recognized it. As the CASp inspector who was called out AFTER the work was done, I can guarantee you the CASp inspector (me) wasn't there when the property owner decided this was a good idea. I was as amazed as you are, and in fact there are some compliance issues that were created by doing this.
Click to expand...
The world just got a little smaller. It would be difficult to not recognize that. The next time that I am in that town I plan on swinging by to see if it is still there. For what its worth, I didn't believe that a CASp was behind this. Note that I said "The claim is that".....but seeing it is proof that a contractor was.....and it is evidence that the contractor needs the services of a CASp.
 
ProCASp said:
I just stumbled across this and immediately recognized it. As the CASp inspector who was called out AFTER the work was done, I can guarantee you the CASp inspector (me) wasn't there when the property owner decided this was a good idea. I was as amazed as you are, and in fact there are some compliance issues that were created by doing this.
Click to expand...
ProCASp,

Thank you for the explanation and please come back and chime in, we need these challenges from time to time.:confused:
 
ProCASp said:
I just stumbled across this and immediately recognized it. As the CASp inspector who was called out AFTER the work was done, I can guarantee you the CASp inspector (me) wasn't there when the property owner decided this was a good idea. I was as amazed as you are, and in fact there are some compliance issues that were created by doing this.
Click to expand...
“Hey Martha! Come look at this! This isn’t what I told them to do. “
 
And it all started with a trash enclosure.... architect drew the plans showing path of travel for the city plan checkers. Building contractor saw the dotted lines on the plans and thought it needed to be marked on the pavement. Large, well known, paving contractor didn't question them and went ahead and did the work. My advice was to make it go away. I doubt they listened... they were so proud of it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top