• 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.

$$$$oops

I found two interesting comments to the article:



Posted by Mud Baby at 4/28/2010 9:05 a.m.The Seattle inspector's pre-con meeting notes seem vague. What specific materials did he specify, and why weren't these in his notes?

In addition, if it is true that "...the building code "did not -- and still does not -- require inspection of grouting and coating of cable terminations..." the city definitely needs to do something about this. Even landscaping specs are way more detailed.

I wonder how many more of these structural ticking time bombs are out there.


Posted by Marine Vet 66-69 at 4/28/2010 11:39 a.m.It still all falls back on the city of Seattle as it was their inspector that approved this building as being constructed according to specification, ready for human habitation.

The inspector is the final back stop for society.
 
Back
Top