mark handler
SAWHORSE
The Engineer may not have "observed" the footing.......during his dirveby.
So you are saying the work doesn't need to match the plans, or the engineer does not need to issue a statement that the work does not meet the plans? The IBC language specifically gives the BO the general authority to require such a statement, and others, if the BO so chooses.Mark K said:ICEThe IBC/CBC language does not require a statement that the work matches the plans nor does the language you provided.
Mark:Mark said:I assume this is an SFD and therefore not covered by the IBC ch 17, TRY THE IRC and there is no STRUCTURAL OBSERVATION in the CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE
California IRC said:RI09.1.5.2 Special Inspections. For special inspections, see California Building Code, Chapter 17.RIIO.3 Certificate issued. After the building official inspects the building or structure and finds no violations of the provisions of this code or other laws that are enforced by the department of building safety, the building official shall issue a certificate of occupancy which shall contain the following:
9. Any special stipulations and conditions of the building permit.
[/QUOTE]Wednesday I had the County inspector out for a footing inspection, he requested and I presented him with three special inspection reports, I also had the structural engineer inspect the steel placement and the County inspector accepted it.Santa Clara County said:
- An engineer designed foundation system and other required special inspection or testing items will require special inspection by the design engineer or a special inspector from a recognized testing laboratory, who shall forward an inspection report to the County. A copy of the report shall also be attached to the on-site building permit. Inspection must also be made by a County inspector.¹
CONARBconarb said:Mark:California has amended the IRC to include the special inspection requirement to defer to Chapter 17 of the IBC. I've been required to use special inspectors for years, the current single family home I'm building has $40,000 allowed for special inspections as required by the AHJ (BTW, the way I read Chapter 17 the special inspector must be employed by the owner and not the contractor, but several others interpret it to allow the contractor to employ the special inspector on the basis that the contractor is the agent of the owner).
The AHJ I'm building within also allows engineers to do the special inspections, I've got a special inspection firm doing the welding inspections, the soils engineer doing the pier inspections, and the structural engineer doing the epoxy doweling inspections.
Wednesday I had the County inspector out for a footing inspection, he requested and I presented him with three special inspection reports, I also had the structural engineer inspect the steel placement and the County inspector accepted it.
¹ http://www.sccgov.org/portal/site/dso/agencyarticle?path=%2Fv7%2FDevelopment Services%2C Office of (DIV)%2FBuilding Inspection&contentId=ef1fa7fe58b34010VgnVCMP230004adc4a92____
This tread is STRUCTURAL OBSERVATIONS not SPECIAL INSPECTIONMark K said:It is the intention of the special inspection provisions that the Contractor be explicitly prohibited from hiring the special inspectors.While the IRC references Chapter 17 of the IBC for special inspections, IBC Section 1704.1 Exemption #2 does not require special inspection for residential units that do not require an architect or engineer. This could include many 1 to 2 family residential buildings.
Chapter 17 is entitled "Structural Tests and Special Inspections", so SFD are covered by Chapter 17.Mark said:I assume this is an SFD and therefore not covered by the IBC ch 17, TRY THE IRC and there is no STRUCTURAL OBSERVATION in the CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE
That is not what he is saying and that is not what the CRC section he is quoting is sayingMark K said:Mark HConarb is correct if he hired the engineer to perform the special inspections in addition to the structural observations. This is specifically allowed by Section 1704.1. It is not an AHJ option.
This is crazy. This is crazy. This is crazy....(jumps in).Mark K said:PapioI am saying that the engineer does not need to make a statement that the work matches the plans. If the engineer were to make a statement that the work matches the plans without qualification this would be a guarantee. The engineer's errors and omissions insurance does not cover guarantees. Thus if the engineer were to make the statement that you want them to make and something went wrong there would be no insurance policy to pay for the owner's loss. Will the owner thank you?
The work needs to be in compliance with the construction documents.
Please point me to the IBC language authorizing the building official to require such statements.
What I meant to say and should have said was that the DP, who created the drawing, will be allowed to do special inspections of a minor nature while he is doing his structural observations. The DP is still required to sign a special inspection agreement document, and takes on the responsibilities of a special inspector. We are not waiving the inspections just the requirement for another party to be involved, and even then it is only at the request of the owner and his DP and again for work of a minor nature.Mark K said:gbhammer:
The summary of the Jerrerson County reporting requirements appears to be consistent with the requirements for special inspection.
Eliminating a special inspection because of structural observation was performed reflects confusion regarding the nature of structural observation. As stated before structural observations do not go into the same detail as special inspections.