beach
Gold Member
Try contracting out plan checks....... architects, contractors, homeowners, etc. really start to appreciate the "Non-contract" government employee.
-
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
Failed Footer Inspection, Not allowed to pour then found this
- Thread starter jar546
- Start date
Beach said,
" If I had to worry about losing my job while enforcing the code, I'd be asking if you want fries with that burger."
Well, I just got a similar situation. Having just started a new job; and, a few weeks into it; I have been told to issue a C of O for an Industrial addition on a slope.
The material used to bring the area of the foundation level; they call it "screed" (a gray gravel-like material) is washing a way around the perimeter about 4 feet from the slab. I'm told this is a great base which was compacted for two days before forming and pouring the foundation for a steel frame building addition.
My first call out I am told is for the final inspection. In the office I was told by the City Administrator that no inspections have been conducted. Other city employees confirm that the footing, slab, structure, electrical, Mechanical (HVAC on top of the structure); have not been inspected; and no records of any inspections. I have been informed that I "will issue a C of O".
Well, Beach, we do have something in common. Glad I kept my apartment.
Uncle Bob
" If I had to worry about losing my job while enforcing the code, I'd be asking if you want fries with that burger."
Well, I just got a similar situation. Having just started a new job; and, a few weeks into it; I have been told to issue a C of O for an Industrial addition on a slope.
The material used to bring the area of the foundation level; they call it "screed" (a gray gravel-like material) is washing a way around the perimeter about 4 feet from the slab. I'm told this is a great base which was compacted for two days before forming and pouring the foundation for a steel frame building addition.
My first call out I am told is for the final inspection. In the office I was told by the City Administrator that no inspections have been conducted. Other city employees confirm that the footing, slab, structure, electrical, Mechanical (HVAC on top of the structure); have not been inspected; and no records of any inspections. I have been informed that I "will issue a C of O".
Well, Beach, we do have something in common. Glad I kept my apartment.
Uncle Bob
Last edited by a moderator:
RJJ
Co-Founder
TimNY: I agree. UB: you are on point as always! MT you raise good questions. Beach: Love the approach! George: It is not so much who is in charge. It comes down to doing a job correctly and that includes inspections. Just one of the little details sometimes ignored by contractors. If it is left unchallenged then it will just continue and we are left with no order in the process. Having inspections with plans on site is not something new. This is just a case of I will do as I please.
I am not employed by the contractor so there is no need for me to provide a letter.beach said:
If I were employed by the contractor, I would be in the position to determine if the footings were sufficient. I could provide a letter regarding the sufficiency if asked.
I am not employed by the contractor so there is no need for me to provide a letter.beach said:
If I were employed by the contractor, I would be in the position to determine if the footings were sufficient. I could provide a letter regarding the sufficiency if asked.
Robert Ellenberg
Registered User
UB--There is currently a mood in the country to change such business as usual among bureaucrats. Whether or not it carries to where you new job is, I don't know. However, it sounds from you post that you don't intend to compromise your integrity just to keep your job. If so, try and take the opportunity to bring this to the public attention. Start by sending a written note (or email) to the official above you to confirm that he is instructing you to issue the CO even though the building is not compliant. Stay there and keep documenting things.
Jobsaver
Registered User
This is the a thing to be determined, and it sounds like a determination is made. What are you going to do about it?RJJ said:
mtlogcabin
SAWHORSE
Lets take this to a different view. How can you pass this and CYA at the same time?
2006 IRC TABLE R403.1 states
1,500 lbs soil capacity with a 12" footing will support a 1 story conventional light–frame construction or a 1 story 4-inch brick veneer over light frame or 8-inch hollow concrete masonry
Foot note a. Where minimum footing width is 12 inches, use of a single wythe of solid or fully grouted 12-inch nominal concrete masonry units is permitted.
Depending on the soils and unbalanced back fill he may be compliant with TABLE R404.1.1(1) PLAIN MASONRY FOUNDATION WALLS.
So JAR is this a single story IRC building?
2006 IRC TABLE R403.1 states
1,500 lbs soil capacity with a 12" footing will support a 1 story conventional light–frame construction or a 1 story 4-inch brick veneer over light frame or 8-inch hollow concrete masonry
Foot note a. Where minimum footing width is 12 inches, use of a single wythe of solid or fully grouted 12-inch nominal concrete masonry units is permitted.
Depending on the soils and unbalanced back fill he may be compliant with TABLE R404.1.1(1) PLAIN MASONRY FOUNDATION WALLS.
So JAR is this a single story IRC building?
beach
Gold Member
If you were employed by the contractor, what would it take for you as an engineer to determine the footings were sufficient and provide a stamped letter stating so?
Would you need to verify steel placement, lap splices, depth/width, soil bearing, etc.? If so, how would you accomplish that?
Or, would you provide a stamped letter stating that, to the best of your knowledge, the footing, steel, etc. were installed per plan/code without actually being able to verify it and hope for the best?
My point is how does an engineer know more about how the footings and steel were installed after the fact any more than an inspector would...... I don't think I'd accept a stamped letter from an engineer unless I knew how he verified it, then.... why would you need an engineer?
Last edited by a moderator:
mtlogcabin
SAWHORSE
Beach In non seismic zones the engineer or inspector could approve it as a plain concrete design with no steel.
beach
Gold Member
Thanks Mt, I'm used to seismic zones..... block walls, footings, etc. always get steel. Of course, the approved plans dictate how it is to be built.....
north star
Sawhorse
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2009
- Messages
- 4,596
* * * *
To me, it sounds like brudgers and GHRoberts are related!
Uncle Bob,
Sorry to hear about your situation. If they're already asking /
requiring you to sign off on non-compliant / non-inspected
projects, they are setting the tone for all future applications.
Once this door has been opened, it will be virtually impossible
to close again, ...until a new administration comes in to office.
Have you looked at teaching "the codes", rather than trying
to enforce them, or possibly as an independent contractor?
The Oklahoma territories sound like an all uphill battle!
Hang in there!
* * * *
To me, it sounds like brudgers and GHRoberts are related!
Uncle Bob,
Sorry to hear about your situation. If they're already asking /
requiring you to sign off on non-compliant / non-inspected
projects, they are setting the tone for all future applications.
Once this door has been opened, it will be virtually impossible
to close again, ...until a new administration comes in to office.
Have you looked at teaching "the codes", rather than trying
to enforce them, or possibly as an independent contractor?
The Oklahoma territories sound like an all uphill battle!
Hang in there!
* * * *
Jobsaver
Registered User
One of the criteria for determining the appropriate course of action is to be consistant with like situations, and to make sure the remedy fits the violation.
But always insist on a permit being pulled within one-three days, or issue a citation and red-tag the job with a stop work order.
What historically does one do in case of a missed footing inspection? In my ahj, we maintain an informal "you get one freebie" rule. Usually, as is the case with the subject jobsite, the inspector did have the opportunity to view the footing depth, width, and, I believe, the existance of rebar. He does have some knowledge of what is there.
In other cases, you may consider a depth of experience with the subcontractor who actually cleans the trench and ties the steel; You have inspected dozens, perhaps hundreds of other footings for the same sub, who historically, has been very consistant, (not necessarily the person having responsibility for calling in the inspection).
Perhaps it is your policy to give no exceptions, and to require a full demolition. Whatever your policy is, try to be consistant and fair.
What RJJ has verified in the subject case, is that the inspections have not been properly performed because of rebellion against the code enforcement system. It is not the case of a honest mistake or misunderstanding. In similar cases in my own ahj, I have virtually always required some level of demo, and a letter from the "permit holder" for anything that cannot be verifed, and a severe warning for a first offense. In any case, I have to have a very strong sense that the actual construction meets the minimum code requirements.
Only RJJ is in a position, based on what he has seen, and his experience with the people and workers involved, the exact remedy that will:
A) demonstrate compliance (technical compliance)
B) develop a proper respect for the building and code enforcement laws (workable relationship)
In this case, had I actually seen the steel on my first visit to the jobsite, and a grounding electrode was present emerging from the concrete, and, I came to believe I had developed a understanding with the "permit holder", I might simply require the "permit holder" to excavate a dozen or so holes to get a visual inspection of the trench (form) depth (even if a known quantity).
In another case, for missed in-wall inspections, I have required full demolition of newly installed wallboard, more because of the defiance against the inspection process than to see behind the wallboard. I had no more problems during the construction of that commercial building.
I expect some to be critical of these methods. But they are efficient and effective. And, to really do a good job as a municipal inspector, efficiences and effectiveness count.
But always insist on a permit being pulled within one-three days, or issue a citation and red-tag the job with a stop work order.
What historically does one do in case of a missed footing inspection? In my ahj, we maintain an informal "you get one freebie" rule. Usually, as is the case with the subject jobsite, the inspector did have the opportunity to view the footing depth, width, and, I believe, the existance of rebar. He does have some knowledge of what is there.
In other cases, you may consider a depth of experience with the subcontractor who actually cleans the trench and ties the steel; You have inspected dozens, perhaps hundreds of other footings for the same sub, who historically, has been very consistant, (not necessarily the person having responsibility for calling in the inspection).
Perhaps it is your policy to give no exceptions, and to require a full demolition. Whatever your policy is, try to be consistant and fair.
What RJJ has verified in the subject case, is that the inspections have not been properly performed because of rebellion against the code enforcement system. It is not the case of a honest mistake or misunderstanding. In similar cases in my own ahj, I have virtually always required some level of demo, and a letter from the "permit holder" for anything that cannot be verifed, and a severe warning for a first offense. In any case, I have to have a very strong sense that the actual construction meets the minimum code requirements.
Only RJJ is in a position, based on what he has seen, and his experience with the people and workers involved, the exact remedy that will:
A) demonstrate compliance (technical compliance)
B) develop a proper respect for the building and code enforcement laws (workable relationship)
In this case, had I actually seen the steel on my first visit to the jobsite, and a grounding electrode was present emerging from the concrete, and, I came to believe I had developed a understanding with the "permit holder", I might simply require the "permit holder" to excavate a dozen or so holes to get a visual inspection of the trench (form) depth (even if a known quantity).
In another case, for missed in-wall inspections, I have required full demolition of newly installed wallboard, more because of the defiance against the inspection process than to see behind the wallboard. I had no more problems during the construction of that commercial building.
I expect some to be critical of these methods. But they are efficient and effective. And, to really do a good job as a municipal inspector, efficiences and effectiveness count.
beach
Gold Member
George,
Maybe I'm not being clear.... If a contractor contacted you, an engineer, because he needs to satisfy the building dept. so he can continue working, and wanted to hire you to provide a stamped letter stating that, in your opinion, the foundation is acceptable. Being that, in your opinion, it is a "non-issue" do you provide the letter and if you do, do you actually verify that the foundation matches the approved plans?
Maybe I'm not being clear.... If a contractor contacted you, an engineer, because he needs to satisfy the building dept. so he can continue working, and wanted to hire you to provide a stamped letter stating that, in your opinion, the foundation is acceptable. Being that, in your opinion, it is a "non-issue" do you provide the letter and if you do, do you actually verify that the foundation matches the approved plans?
KZQuixote
Sawhorse
Don't mean to make light of your situation. I took a job as an inspector many years ago. My first inspection was a simple framing inspection which I declined to approve as it was just not ready. I left my card asking the builder to call me. Before I got back to the office he was raging on the phone demanding that I return to the job site. Came to find out that that was the first time in eleven years that that department had failed to approve anything it was asked to look at.:roll:Uncle Bob said:North Star,Thanks, I solved the problem. Will be back home for Thanksgiving.
Uncle Bob
I lasted two tough years and then moved on.
For your Burger and Fries entertainment: [video=youtube;oKikZLRdJVE]
Bill
beach
Gold Member
Hey U.B.,
Over twenty years ago, a friend of mine was into his first week as a brand new building inspector and red tagged a window change out, about ten minutes later, he gets a page from the building official (No cell phone at that time) and found out he red tagged the city managers house, the BO told the city manager to come in and get a permit...which he did and told my friend to go back that afternoon and inspect it. The city manager is long gone, but the inspector is still there........
Hang in there!!
Over twenty years ago, a friend of mine was into his first week as a brand new building inspector and red tagged a window change out, about ten minutes later, he gets a page from the building official (No cell phone at that time) and found out he red tagged the city managers house, the BO told the city manager to come in and get a permit...which he did and told my friend to go back that afternoon and inspect it. The city manager is long gone, but the inspector is still there........
Hang in there!!
I had an inspector out for a framing inspection. He started saying things were not to code. I asked him to write down the violations or put up a nice green tag. He refused. He left. I called the AHJ and explained what happened. The AHJ said the inspector was never sent out.
I said fine, I have a recording of the phone conversation and audio and video of the inspector on my property, and if any inspector or law enforcement officer shows up on the job site, ....
Well you get the idea.
I said fine, I have a recording of the phone conversation and audio and video of the inspector on my property, and if any inspector or law enforcement officer shows up on the job site, ....
Well you get the idea.
beach
Gold Member
I don't get it
I only do work for existing clients and new clients who are referred to me by people I trust. There is no need for a letter.beach said:
---
For my usual compensation I will show up in court and say it is a non-issue. And that the AHJ's office is practicing engineering without a license and without the ethics I have to practice. I will even file actions with the state board and ask a state legislator to assist in getting the Attorney General involved. The exact details would depend on the specific details of the situation.
Sure hope you have deep pockets.
beach
Gold Member
That's insane and very funny!!!
Thanks for answering!
Thanks for answering!
Jobsaver
Registered User
in·sane [ in sáyn ]
adjective
Definition:
1. legally considered as psychiatrically disordered: considered legally incompetent or irresponsible because of a psychiatric disorder
2. lacking reasonable thought: showing a complete lack of reason or foresight ( informal )
adjective
Definition:
1. legally considered as psychiatrically disordered: considered legally incompetent or irresponsible because of a psychiatric disorder
2. lacking reasonable thought: showing a complete lack of reason or foresight ( informal )