How to pass building inspection?

[Mac Moonfire]

I was asked recently to give a short presentation on "How to pass a building inspection?"
Thought I would reach out, and see what you guys think.

So far, I have:
- Build a professional team emphasizing know-how and communication skills.
- Contact municipal planning and building teams early in the process.
- Submit detailed construction drawings.
- Obtain necessary permits.
- Prioritize egress, fire safety, ventilation, and general safety measures.
- Address any deficiencies before scheduling a re-inspection.
- Be organized and up to date with documents before, during, and after construction.
- Ensure the worksite is clean and safe, reflecting pride in your work.
- Contractor presence on-site is encouraged, but rarely required. Be mindful to respect the inspector's need for focus during inspections.
- Schedule required inspections promptly to avoid complications. DO NOT COVER!
- Arguing with a building official is like fighting with a pig in mud, after a while you realize the pig likes it.

Have I nailed it? what am I missing?

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

Rather than "What am I missing?" I would suggest that a better question is "How much can I cut out?"

Who asked you to do the presentation? If the question is really "How to pass a building inspection?", then the answer has nothing to do with communication skills; municipal planning; submittal of detailed construction drawings (those are required, of course, but that's all done before the permit is issued, it's not a factor in passing an inspection); or prioritizing egress, fire safety, ventilation, or general safety measures (those are design issues, not construction issues -- except for workplace safety).

An inspector comes to the site to inspect an element of the work for which you have requested and scheduled an inspection. If you want to pass the inspection, make certain that the work has been executed in accordance with the approved construction documents and the applicable codes. That's all there is to it. It ain't rocket science. Don't make it out to be more complicated than it is.

DON'T make unauthorized changes in the plans
DON'T make unauthorized substitutions of materials
DON'T cover up work that hasn't been inspected yet
DO have the approved plans available on the site
DO have the relevant subcontractor(s) on the site to answer any questions, and to make note of any issues the inspector finds
DON'T make excuses for shoddy, non-conforming work
DON'T call the inspector names for doing his job. YOUR job is to build according to the plans and to code. His job is to verify that the work is in compliance with the approved plans and the codes. It's not the inspector's fault if you or your subcontractors don't follow the plans and the codes.

I'm a senior citizen -- I've been doing architecture and building inspection for a rather long time. There's a saying that goes back as far as I can remember in my career: "Nobody has time to do it right the first time, but everyone has time to tear it out and do it over." No inspector I know enjoys failing work. We don't do it to get our jollies for the day; we do it because we are being paid to do it. To put it bluntly, our job is to make sure that the contractor does his job.

 

[Joe.B]

What's the audience? Is this being presented to contractors? Plumbers? Electricians? Large construction companies? Design/builder with one helper? Knowing the audience will greatly help order a meaningful presentation. Once you know the audience, then determine what jurisdiction(s) they're trying to pass inspections in. If you're talking to a specific group (or type) of contractors, and you know the single jurisdiction they're working in, then you can have a very detailed presentation for how they can pass those inspections. The more general and diverse the group, and the more jurisdictions being covered, then the more general the presentation needs to be.

My favorite one-liner is: "Plan the build, build the plan."

 

[Yikes]

You can start with this anecdote from my sister-in-law’s dad, who was a POW twice over: WW2 (survived Bataan death march) and later in the Korean War. Afterwards settled in the Idaho panhandle and his life experience made him very much a “live free or die” guy.

One day back in the ‘60s a building inspector came by and asked to see the permit for the addition he was building on their house. My SIL says her dad smiled and said, “sure c’mon inside, I have it in the living room”.
He pointed to his shotgun and war medals enshrined over the fireplace mantle, and said, “this is America, and that’s all the permit I need”. The inspector thanked him and went on his way.

 

[ICE]

No inspector I know enjoys failing work.

I've met plenty. They not only enjoy it, they make it happen.

what am I missing?

A blue room.
Have the plans stapled together and on a table/tailgate. Include copies of all relevant reports.
Be intimately familiar with the plans and try to anticipate questions.
Pay close attention and do not interrupt the inspector.
Depending on the type of inspection: Have on hand a flashlight/tape measure/string-line/etc.
Sweep out the site and cease all work/noise.
If the path is muddy make an effort to stay out of the mud.
Tie off extension ladders....and dogs.
Be prepared to tackle small issues immediately.
If the location is difficult to find, help the inspector find it.
Make sure there is a place to park....and warn him if he parks on the wrong side of the street on sweeper day as he will get a ticket.
And lastly, just be nice. No matter what your day/week/life is like, try to maintain a friendly, upbeat attitude.

 

[Yikes]

If the inspector tells you that something is a code violation, politely ask for the specific code citation/reference.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

If the inspector tells you that something is a code violation, politely ask for the specific code citation/reference.

Yes. They should tell you but, if they don't cite a code section, you have a right to know what code provisions they claim you have violated. If you don't know, how can you be expected to fix it?

According to the State prosecutor who gave us our annual in-service classes pre-COVID, "If you don't have a citation, you don't have a violation."

Where I work now, the inspectors all carry cellular-enabled tablets with a subscription to UpCodes, so they can look up any code at any time.

 

[ICE]

If the inspector tells you that something is a code violation, politely ask for the specific code citation/reference.

There is no polite way to challenge the inspector. Get the corrections in writing and then do your research. If you don't have a code book you can bring the written violation to the internet. With the advent of AI, bogus violations will percolate to the top in short order.

According to the State prosecutor who gave us our annual in-service classes pre-COVID, "If you don't have a citation, you don't have a violation."

You'd have my gratitude if you shelved that platitude. Of course there's a violation. If the inspector is required to provide a code section at every turn....well guess what, that inspector will be tempted to turn away from some violations.
For as many times as that topic has been hashed out here, it has been established that your odds of winning the lotto are better than the odds of getting code sections with your violations...your particular jurisdiction aside.

 

[Joe.B]

your particular jurisdiction aside.

Not just his. Not everyone lives in the concrete jungle.

 

[ICE]

Not just his. Not everyone lives in the concrete jungle.

Oh I am aware that there are outliers. Wait for some of the Canadians to weigh in. However you Shirley are a true exception to the Norm. Keep in mind that the typical forum member is not typical out there in the wild. The percentage of the inspectors that come here, or even know that we are here, is so small as to be insignificant.

Oh no! I just realized that this is in the Canadian Forum and I swore off posting in the Canadian Forum. My bad. I don't want to mess it up by deleting what I posted; please accept my apology, disregard what I have said and know that I hope to do better than this.

 

[Joe.B]

Oh I am aware that there are outliers. Wait for some of the Canadians to weigh in. However you Shirley are a true exception to the Norm. Keep in mind that the typical forum member is not typical out there in the wild. The percentage of the inspectors that come here, or even know that we are here, is so small as to be insignificant.

I agree to some extent. I've also had the opportunity to go to lots of trainings and I've met a lot of inspectors who are not on this forum. However, your logic probably applies to them too... But it's not a flat zero.

 

[SCBO1]

How to pass building inspection?​

Tell them "That's not code in West Palm Beach!"

 

[Inspector Gadget]

I'm almost tempted to write "how NOT to pass an inspection."

- Ignore professional development opportunities at all costs.
- do not, under any circumstances, own a copy of the Code.
- If by accident, you do have a copy of the Code, do NOT read it
- Do not use the best materials, supplies and equipment.
- Hire unqualified people. Qualified people are annoyances, really. Besides, they cost more, and how the heck can you compete in THIS market by paying reasonable wages?
- Do not train your staff. See above.
- Do everything with the general attitude of "screw it, hide it, we don't care." The best expression is "it looks good from my house."
- Screw the plan. That just gets in the way of creative solutions. Or cheap ones.
- If a violation is found, always defend your ignorance by saying "I've been doing it this way for 20 years" and pretend that any violations must be a function of "newfangled codes" or something "the inspector made up."

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

There is no polite way to challenge the inspector. Get the corrections in writing and then do your research. If you don't have a code book you can bring the written violation to the internet. With the advent of AI, bogus violations will percolate to the top in short order.


You'd have my gratitude if you shelved that platitude. Of course there's a violation. If the inspector is required to provide a code section at every turn....well guess what, that inspector will be tempted to turn away from some violations.
For as many times as that topic has been hashed out here, it has been established that your odds of winning the lotto are better than the odds of getting code sections with your violations...your particular jurisdiction aside.

You work in your jurisdiction, I work in mine. In this state, every action by a code official (building official, plan reviewer, inspector) can be appealed up an escalating chain that culminates in the Superior Court. Sooner or later, if we fail an inspection without citing the code section, we're going to lose -- if not before the appeal board, then when we get into court. Taking it all that way just to lose because we didn't write down a code section is a tremendous waste of time, energy, and resources. Maybe in your jurisdiction applicants aren't litigious types. Around here, it seems like very other owner is an attorney, and every contractor has a cousin or a brother-in-law who is an attorney. My boss spends hours every week in meetings with the Town Counsel over building code issues.

We can't afford NOT to cite code sections.

 

[ICE]

Taking it all that way just to lose because we didn't write down a code section is a tremendous waste of time, energy, and resources.

Well since I have already blown my agreement to avoid the Canadian Forum and you keep quoting me with specious arguments here goes:

Using conservative numbers I determined that in my career I wrote upwards of 200,000 corrections...I'm guessing quite a ways upward... not once did I end up defending a correction in court. You make it sound like it's a daily occurrence... and perhaps for you, it is... how would I know any different. What I do know is that pushing that practice on the rest of us because you have a higher calling just doesn't work.

 

[Yikes]

There is no polite way to challenge the inspector. Get the corrections in writing and then do your research. If you don't have a code book you can bring the written violation to the internet. With the advent of AI, bogus violations will percolate to the top in short order.

My point is simply this - by way of example:

• If an inspector is on the jobsite and tells me something is wrong: "That's a 2-hour rated elevator shaft. Those swinging fire doors on the elevators need to be 120 minute rated, not 20 minute."
• The first thing I should do is look on the approved plans and see if it is required on the plans. If it is on the plans, not need to ask for a code citation.
• If it is not required on the plans, then the polite way to ask is: "I don't see where that's required on the approved set of plans. The architect is going to require a code citation so that they can research and process this change to their construction documents, so can you please ALSO write the applicable code reference section # as part of your correction notice?".
• When the correction is written up, then the DPOR remains responsible. Or, as happens in perhaps as many as 30% of these situations on my projects, the inspector may realize in the process of writing it up that he wasn't seeing the whole picture. In my specific example, the elevator's own doors provided the 120 minute fire protection, and the swing door was just for smoke seal only. He rescinded the correction.

 

[ICE]

My point is simply this - by way of example:

• If an inspector is on the jobsite and tells me something is wrong: "That's a 2-hour rated elevator shaft. Those swinging fire doors on the elevators need to be 120 minute rated, not 20 minute."

If I wrote that correction I would already be in the code book.

How about the HVAC inspection for a furnace and condenser? 8 to 20 corrections is not unusual. The pugnacious contractor standing there telling me that I have to provide code sections is fooling himself. For starters, he made that many mistakes. How is it that he has the temerity to make demands? How about he get educated enough to make fewer mistakes and then charge people like he’s a real contractor?

It’s always the worst contractor that insists on code sections. I have provided the section numbers and they come back with needing the text of the section. Given the text of the section they need an explanation of the text. After that they want to know what they are supposed to do.

I have gone down that road only to discover that the contractor knew all along and was hoping to confound me.

And by the way Yikes, if I was told that an architect will need a code section number, well I would have to wonder just how sharp that architect is.

 

[Yikes]

If I wrote that correction I would already be in the code book.

How about the HVAC inspection for a furnace and condenser? 8 to 20 corrections is not unusual. The pugnacious contractor standing there telling me that I have to provide code sections is fooling himself. For starters, he made that many mistakes. How is it that he has the temerity to make demands? How about he get educated enough to make fewer mistakes and then charge people like he’s a real contractor?

It’s always the worst contractor that insists on code sections. I have provided the section numbers and they come back with needing the text of the section. Given the text of the section they need an explanation of the text. After that they want to know what they are supposed to do.

I have gone down that road only to discover that the contractor knew all along and was hoping to confound me.

And by the way Yikes, if I was told that an architect will need a code section number, well I would have to wonder just how sharp the architect is.

ICE, when I ask the inspector to city the code, I am totally fine with that inspector wondering how sharp of an architect I am, because it cuts both ways: when an inspector can't cite the code, I wonder how sharp of an inspector they are.

Perhaps you are really sharp with the code book as compared to other inspectors I've met, but I'm telling you that in my experience on many projects about 30% of the time when a contractor calls me (the architect) and tells me the inspector has issued a correction that will be a potential change order, when I say I need them to cite the specific code section violation, the inspector backs off.

The most recent one this week was an inspector who said that a public restroom alteration could not have the diaper changing fold-down table in the accessible toilet stall. No code citation was given. The inspector forgot that the table was already pre-existing legally under a previous permit, and was not in the scope of this alteration permit.
When the inspector was asked to provide the code citation that would apply to this existing condition, they were forced to read 11B-226.2 for themselves and saw that it was italicized, meaning the language was unique to California Building Code, and as-installed it was otherwise already ADA compliant. They backed off.

 

[ICE]

The most recent one this week was an inspector who said that a public restroom alteration could not have the diaper changing fold-down table in the accessible toilet stall. No code citation was given.

Well you won that one. But who loses? The inspector found the changing table in a toilet stall and thought better of it. Seems wrong to me and if you think about it, it might seem wrong to you as well. However, you were able to thwart the inspector with code and the diaper changing table remains in an accessible toilet stall. That's one way to plug up a toilet... oh but there's a sign.

I understand your reluctance to cause a client to spend money for anything that is not a straight up code requirement. I also understand an inspector finding a diaper changing table in an accessible toilet stall and thinking "This is just wrong." Code or not, the inspector was correct... and then he found out that wrong and a code violation can be two different things.

You stated that roughly 30% of the time an inspector folds up his tent when asked for a code section. That doesn't necessarily mean that the inspector was wrong. Could it be that the inspector was lazy? How about overworked? Maybe no good with a code book? Retiring the next day? So you see there can be reasons other than simply wrong. Now I ask you this: If the inspector fades do you follow up to find the truth of the matter?

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

I understand your reluctance to cause a client to spend money for anything that is not a straight up code requirement. I also understand an inspector finding a diaper changing table in a toilet stall and thinking "This must be a violation." Code or not, the inspector was correct... and then he found out that wrong and a code violation can be two different things.

Why should a client be expected to spend money on something he doesn't want or need if it's not a code requirement, but just something an inspector thinks "should be" done that way? The bottom line is, if it's not a "straight up" code requirement -- it's not a requirement, and an inspector has no legal basis for requiring it.

As one of our former state building inspectors (since deceased) often stated in our in-service classes, "The code is the least you can accept and the most you can ask for." It doesn't matter how "wrong" you or Yikes or I might think some existing condition is, and it doesn't matter if that condition wouldn't be allowed today as new construction -- if the existing building code says it can remain, then it's NOT "wrong." It's legally code conforming, and that's all we need to know.

I am candidly puzzled by your approach. In other discussions you have criticized me for saying that I would go by the book on various issues where you think something should be allowed to slide, yet here's an issue where going by the book allows the condition to slide and you proclaim that -- code notwithstanding -- it's "wrong," apparently because you don't like it.

It's much easier to just go by the book. Then you don't have to keep track of what you've let slide on one project so you can be sure to let the same thing slide on all projects.

 

[ICE]

if the existing building code says it can remain, then it's NOT "wrong."

Did you make note of my stating that something can be profoundly wrong and also not a code violation. A diaper changing station located in a toilet stall is, without question, a stupid idea. Apparently, sufficient code machinations rendered it legal. It's no less stupid. Your assertion that anything lacking a formal code violation is by virtue of that status, not wrong is... well ... wrong.

Somebody ring a bell for Artificial Intelligence would agree with you whereas common sense would not. It's a new day coming.

 

[ICE]

I am candidly puzzled by your approach.

You create your own confusion where none exists.

 

[Yikes]

Well you won that one. But who loses? The inspector found the changing table in a toilet stall and thought better of it. Seems wrong to me and if you think about it, it might seem wrong to you as well. However, you were able to thwart the inspector with code and the diaper changing table remains in an accessible toilet stall. That's one way to plug up a toilet... oh but there's a sign.

I understand your reluctance to cause a client to spend money for anything that is not a straight up code requirement. I also understand an inspector finding a diaper changing table in an accessible toilet stall and thinking "This is just wrong." Code or not, the inspector was correct... and then he found out that wrong and a code violation can be two different things.

You stated that roughly 30% of the time an inspector folds up his tent when asked for a code section. That doesn't necessarily mean that the inspector was wrong. Could it be that the inspector was lazy? How about overworked? Maybe no good with a code book? Retiring the next day? So you see there can be reasons other than simply wrong. Now I ask you this: If the inspector fades do you follow up to find the truth of the matter?

The great thing is that this is The Building Code Forum, and the title of this thread is How To Pass Inspection. So my answer is, simply make sure that all parties, including the inspector, are following the code.
If the inspector thinks something that is actually code compliant is still wrong, they are free to engage in the code development process to lobby for change. But going ultra vires is not going to help anyone.

For what it’s worth, the restroom in question was in a daycare+preschool facility that was built in the 80’s, and was code compliant for its original era. The other upgrades in the current alteration were solely for ADA compliance. There is no room to put the changing table elsewhere without a technical infeasibility.

 

[ICE]

If the inspector thinks something that is actually code compliant is still wrong, they are free to engage in the code development process to lobby for change

That translates to, “Bay at the Moon”.

But going ultra vires is not going to help anyone.

This thread is not the first time that you have given advice suggesting that the inspector should be, and in your practice is, asked to provide a code section to validate a correction. High minded corrections that end up on an architects desk might deserve a code section. However, I would expect the architect to first perform their own investigation prior to asking the inspector to provide a code section. When the architect is aware that the inspector is wrong, the architect should explain that to the inspector instead of sending the inspector down a rabbit hole in search of what doesn’t exist.

I can tell you that going ultra vires succeeds 99.999% of the time. That’s mainly due to the pedestrian nature of 99.999% of corrections. I know inspectors that believe their own bullshit.

Perhaps you are really sharp with the code book as compared to other inspectors I've met

I am average to poor when it comes to looking up code sections. I am above average in the number of corrections written. Now and then I write a correction that sticks with me. I’m not sure if it was a valid correction so at the end of the day I try to find it in the code. If I can’t find it, I wait for the Moon to be high in the sky …….