Questionable work by Contractor

[Rraddish]

Long time listener, second time poster.

I'm hoping to get some feedback on whether my observations are valid code concerns.

The project is a large landscape redesign and build for a single family home.

The problem involves a contractors work and the plans his structural engineer has provided. There have been ongoing issues with the contractor deviating from the SE plans, requiring several plan revisions. The most recent set appears to have some glaring red flags.


Immediate concern is SE specifying lag bolts through anchored brick veneer for a couple deck ledger connections. I took a closer look at the plans and site photos and believe there are several more problems.
Main issues are deck/balcony supported on anchored veneer, bad ledger connections, unsupported brick veneer, and the majority of deck hardware installed with the incorrect nails.

I'm not 100 percent sure if the things I'm seeing are code issues and would appreciate any thoughts or feedback.

I put everything into a pdf and attached it.


Please let me know if uploading pdf's is frowned upon.

 

[Joe.B]

Two questions for you, then I'd be willing to throw in my two cents.

1. What's your role in this project? I.e. homeowner, designer, neighbor, etc.

2. Has the SE who did the plans come and look at any of this? If so, what did they say?

 

[Rraddish]

Thanks for the reply. Happy to provide additional context. I am the landscape architect for the project. I am contracted to the Project Manager. The SE was contracted by the builder responsible for the structures. The structures will be in an unfinished state at the completion of the builders contract. The remaining design work falls under my scope of work.
I informed the PM of my concerns, who communicated them to the builder. PM, builder, and SE performed a site inspection. List of concerns was shared via PM with the builder and SE, who advised if items were problematic. Veneer, connections, and beams recieved no response either way. SE advised Lag bolts were sufficient and to code. The attached plans were issued after the site visit and list.

 

[Joe.B]

Here are some examples of code sections that you may find useful, and it will get you to the right area to find other interesting things. In general any engineered product must be installed per manufactures directions. You may want to look for access to ASTM D7147. Similarly, any engineered product in question will have some referenced standard (ASTM, ANSI, or similar) and you may want to get your hands on those too.

2304.10.4 Joist Hangers and Framing Anchors
Connections depending on joist hangers or framing anchors, ties and other mechanical fastenings not otherwise covered are permitted where approved. The vertical load-bearing capacity, torsional moment capacity and deflection characteristics of joist hangers shall be determined in accordance with ASTM D7147.

2304.10.7 Load Path
Where wall framing members are not continuous from the foundation sill to the roof, the members shall be secured to ensure a continuous load path. Where required, sheet metal clamps, ties or clips shall be formed of galvanized steel or other approved corrosion-resistant material not less than 0.0329-inch (0.836 mm) base metal thickness.

2304.10.8 Framing Requirements
Wood columns and posts shall be framed to provide full end bearing. Alternatively, column-and-post end connections shall be designed to resist the full compressive loads, neglecting end-bearing capacity. Column-and-post end connections shall be fastened to resist lateral and net induced uplift forces.

2308.1.2 Connections and Fasteners
Connectors and fasteners used in conventional construction shall comply with the requirements of Section 2304.10.

2308.4.3 Engineered Wood Products
Engineered wood products shall be installed in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations. Cuts, notches and holes bored in trusses, structural composite lumber, structural glued-laminated members or I-joists are not permitted except where permitted by the manufacturer's recommendations or where the effects of such alterations are specifically considered in the design of the member by a registered design professional.

2308.7.9 Engineered Wood Products
Prefabricated wood I-joists, structural glued-laminated timber and structural composite lumber shall not be notched or drilled except where permitted by the manufacturer's recommendations or where the effects of such alterations are specifically considered in the design of the member by a registered design professional.

 

[Rraddish]

Joe B., Thank you for taking the time to reply and point me in the right direction. I really appreciate it.

 

[steveray]

All of them are code issues....All of them can be solved by the all seeing all knowing engineer...

 

[Rraddish]

Steveray, I appreciate your feedback. The SE went to the site and reviewed the photos before he issued the attached plans.

I hope he, in his infinite wisdom, bestows upon us the gift of construction knowledge in his next set of revisions.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

The problem involves a contractors work and the plans his structural engineer has provided. There have been ongoing issues with the contractor deviating from the SE plans, requiring several plan revisions. The most recent set appears to have some glaring red flags.

Immediate concern is SE specifying lag bolts through anchored brick veneer for a couple deck ledger connections. I took a closer look at the plans and site photos and believe there are several more problems.
Main issues are deck/balcony supported on anchored veneer, bad ledger connections, unsupported brick veneer, and the majority of deck hardware installed with the incorrect nails.

What's the contractual network? You refer to the SE as "his" (the contractor's) structural engineer. How is the SE working for the contractor? Unless the SE is acting as a special inspector (which isn't really "a thing" under the IRC) it's generally not unlawful for an engineer to work for a contractor, but it's unusual unless it's a design/build contractor -- and if it were a design/build project, you would probably be working for the contractor, as well.

Next: if the contractor's work didn't match the structural drawings, why were the drawings revised? Why wasn't the contractor required to correct the work?

Who is the contractor working for? What's the form of agreement? At what point can the owner just stop paying the contractor until defective work is removed and corrected?

 

[Rraddish]

What's the contractual network? You refer to the SE as "his" (the contractor's) structural engineer. How is the SE working for the contractor? Unless the SE is acting as a special inspector (which isn't really "a thing" under the IRC) it's generally not unlawful for an engineer to work for a contractor, but it's unusual unless it's a design/build contractor -- and if it were a design/build project, you would probably be working for the contractor, as well.

Next: if the contractor's work didn't match the structural drawings, why were the drawings revised? Why wasn't the contractor required to correct the work?

Who is the contractor working for? What's the form of agreement? At what point can the owner just stop paying the contractor until defective work is removed and corrected?

Mr. Chronicler, Thank you for taking the time to reply to my post. I can see did a poor job describing roles and relationships.

The Owner contracted with a Design/Builder (DB) for the exterior improvement project.
I am the LA, my design contract is with the DB.
The Contractor is performing a residential remodel for the Owner in an unrelated contract.
The DB approached the Contractor to build the exterior structures. They include two pavilions and an elevated deck. The Contractor is building the structures under a separate contract with the Owner to reduce total cost.
The Contractor retained the SE, who is providing structural design for the exterior structures.

I noted the Contractor had deviated from the SE plans and informed DB that I needed SE to verify the changes and issue revised plans for my portion of the work. The SE revised his plans to match most of Contractors as-built work. No one can compel the Contractor to make any change, and the DB has no desire to argue with the SE or Contractor. The Owner is not actively engaged with the project and trusts DB and Contractor to oversee and deliver the project.

The Contractor is working for the Owner through two direct contracts. One contract is for the residential remodel. The other contract is for the exterior structures.
The Owner is not aware that the Contractors work is defective. The DB has no intention of informing the Owner.


Quite a mouthful huh?

 

[ICE]

Would a LA be expected to know about and identify the structural deficiencies? I understand the moral obligation to be forthcoming to the involved parties with regard to the obvious shortcomings however, once you have voiced your concerns I think there is no more for you to do.

You may feel obliged to alert the owner and that raises another however, which is the D/B, SE and contractor can easily down play what you have to say. At that point you will have damaged you standing and accomplished little. Hopefully you have documented your alarm with emails.

By the way, kudos for the Sawhorse subscription with you first forum foray. That shows a commitment to truth.

 

[Yankee Chronicler]

I'm still confused, because in all my experience the term "design/builder" refers to an entity that acts as both the designer and the genral contractor. Now you come along and talk about a design/builder but then you mention a contractor as a separate entity from the design/builder.

Where's the building official in all this mess?

 

[Joe.B]

Where's the building official in all this mess?