The Never-Ending Struggle Against the Building Department: A Contractor’s Lament

[Yankee Chronicler]

12 departments? That's mind-numbing.

Where I work, applicants have to first clear zoning. For things like clearly established "by right" applications like a new house, it's a simple zoning review to verify that the proposed plan fits on the lot within the setbacks. Major developments (subdivisions, large commercial buildings, etc.) go through planning to get site plan approval. Engineering, roads, and sewer are all part of the zoning process.

The comes the building permit. Plans have to be reviewed and approved by the building department, the fire marshal and (for certain uses such as restaurants) the health department. The building department receives the plans for the fire department and transmits them internally. Applicants never have to talk to the fire marshal unless they wish to do so.

 

[Leo LaLone]

I feel your pain....but there is a glimmer of hope....and you're not going to like it (at first). The day will come and it will probably come sometime this year....when :
1. You will have your own AI agent (who is your advocate) living on your phone and advising you on every nail you pound (who does that anymore), every wire you pull, every yard of mud you pour because...
2. He/she/it is a certified building inspector, knows all the codes, knows most if not all the "best practices", is a licensed engineer (yes. Electrical, structural, mechanical, civil, etc.) and is a member of AIA (or at least passed all the tests.
3. And will sign off on your project because the AI has a complete record of what you have done and certifies it was done to code.
4. And quite possibly create the construction documents (plans, etc.)
What does this mean?
A. No need for a Building Department
B. No permits
C. No plans examiner, no inspectors, no Building Official
D. No Bloody Fees (or at least a diminishing amount).
E. Reduced cost to clients
Why do I know this?
Because I'm a former building inspector, residential tax appraiser, General contractor, home designer and AI promotor. I'm actively trying to teach an AI to produce construction documents in AutoCAD. All told...been doin' this for over 50 years. Yep I'm old but determined. Hurry Sundown.

 

[Yikes]

At this point, if you could just get a beta version going for single family residence design, you would be the hero of fire-ravaged Los Angeles County.

 

[Mr. Inspector]

I have never, and will never use any sort of standard correction list.

I do have a standard correction list that I use for almost all commercial projects. A few times I can take a couple items off of it before I send it.

1. Specify codes designed to
2. Specify method designed to in the IEBC
3. Specify use
4. Specify occupancy
5. Specify construction type.
6. Provide 3 copies of plans
7. Plans are to be designed and sealed by PA certified architect/engineer.
8. Provide number of occupants
9. Provide an accessible route and indicate how the project complies with IBC chapter 11.
10. Provide electrical, mechanical and plumbing plans
11. Indicate loads and information required per IBC 1603
12. Specify any fire or smoke protection required by code.
13. Provide a means of egress plan.
14. Provide a site plan

 

[Paul Sweet]

When I lived and worked around Richmond, VA some of the surrounding counties had a site plan review process which involved several governmental departments, including planning, zoning, fire & EMS, utilities, traffic, environmental, etc. The Planning Dept. coordinated the process. The few projects I was involved in took more time & effort to pass the site plan review than the building permit. I can't imagine having to deal with all the departments individually.

 

[Leo LaLone]

We live in interesting times. When my AI agent gets up and running....a whole bunch of this will go away. We can wave good-by at the problems as they go by. I'm thinking of naming my agent Hammurabi.

 

[Joe.B]

 

[Leo LaLone]

LOL. (It's a movie Joe.B) there is actually very little evidence that AI agents will be mis-aligned.

 

[Sifu]

I do have a standard correction list that I use for almost all commercial projects. A few times I can take a couple items off of it before I send it.

1. Specify codes designed to
2. Specify method designed to in the IEBC
3. Specify use
4. Specify occupancy
5. Specify construction type.
6. Provide 3 copies of plans
7. Plans are to be designed and sealed by PA certified architect/engineer.
8. Provide number of occupants
9. Provide an accessible route and indicate how the project complies with IBC chapter 11.
10. Provide electrical, mechanical and plumbing plans
11. Indicate loads and information required per IBC 1603
12. Specify any fire or smoke protection required by code.
13. Provide a means of egress plan.
14. Provide a site plan

OK, maybe I should make a standard list. Most of those would be on most of my plans. SAD.

Now, to be clear, I have many of them saved as markups in my toolbox (BB) that I use on my marked plans, so maybe that counts.

 

[jar546]

We love our preloaded toolbox on Bluebeam. We all customize our own.

 

[Sifu]

We love our preloaded toolbox on Bluebeam. We all customize our own.

I have mine categorized by which codes, and types of permit. My problem is I have so many I forget that I made them a tool and end up writing half of them again anyway. I learned that from the department of redundancy department.

And to clarify a little further, when I wrote that I don't use a standard list I took it to mean a form letter or set of canned comments to be attached in lieu of a comprehensive review. Many times I see plans reviewed by others that fill an entire page with so many canned comments you can't see the underlying data. Most of the time the very codes listed are all covered within the plans themselves, which proves they weren't scrutinized very well. I think it is an obvious attempt to make it look like a review actually took place, when it didn't. JMHO.

 

[Yikes]

View attachment 15079

Here you go!

https://www.pushkin.fm/podcasts/whats-your-problem/teaching-ai-to-build-stuff-in-the-physical-world

 

[Joe.B]

(It's a movie Joe.B)

Oh thank goodness, it was just a movie. I'll sleep better now.

 

[Paul Sweet]

Sometimes I think that AI stands for Artificial Idiocy as often as Artificial Intelligence. Garbage In Garbage Out is still valid.

 

[Yikes]

Sometimes I think that AI stands for Artificial Idiocy as often as Artificial Intelligence. Garbage In Garbage Out is still valid.

I know with a couple of years ago at OpenAI there was an experiment where they limited it to all information available in 1900, then asked Chat GPT to solve the problem of inventing a heavier-than-air flying machine. Of course AI concluded that such a machine was an impossibility. That's because it could only make inferences based on existing available information. Not exactly "garbage", but certainly lacking the imagination to conceive the physical world differently.

There was a quote from Einstein that said theoretical physics could only advance through intuition, not logic. A command of the facts alone is insufficient for innovation.
"...the supreme task of the physicist is the search for those highly universal laws from which a picture of the world can be obtained by pure deduction. There is no logical path leading to these laws. They are only to be reached by intuition, based on something like an intellectual love."
(Philosophers would say that intuition is a form of faith.)

 

[jar546]

I know with a couple of years ago at OpenAI there was an experiment where they limited it to all information available in 1900, then asked Chat GPT to solve the problem of inventing a heavier-than-air flying machine. Of course AI concluded that such a machine was an impossibility. That's because it could only make inferences based on existing available information. Not exactly "garbage", but certainly lacking the imagination to conceive the physical world differently.

There was a quote from Einstein that said theoretical physics could only advance through intuition, not logic. A command of the facts alone is insufficient for innovation.
"...the supreme task of the physicist is the search for those highly universal laws from which a picture of the world can be obtained by pure deduction. There is no logical path leading to these laws. They are only to be reached by intuition, based on something like an intellectual love."
(Philosophers would say that intuition is a form of faith.)

This is AI responding to your post.

That experiment highlights a fundamental limitation of AI—its reliance on existing data. But it also underscores why human ingenuity remains irreplaceable. AI doesn’t innovate in the way humans do because it lacks the ability to challenge assumptions or introduce radical new ideas that don’t have precedent in its training data.

The Wright brothers didn’t just extrapolate from known facts; they combined mechanical intuition, trial and error, and a deep understanding of aerodynamics to achieve powered flight. If AI had been around in 1900, it might have been useful for crunching numbers or simulating airflow, but the leap of faith required to attempt the impossible? That’s a uniquely human trait.

Einstein’s point about intuition is key here. Innovation often comes from seeing beyond what’s currently accepted. AI is getting better at assisting in discovery—helping physicists model quantum mechanics, for example—but at its core, it’s still a tool, not a thinker. It’s a mirror of human knowledge, not the source of new paradigms. That’s why true breakthroughs, whether in aviation, physics, or even philosophy, still require human imagination.

 

[BN4537]

This is AI responding to your post.

That experiment highlights a fundamental limitation of AI—its reliance on existing data. But it also underscores why human ingenuity remains irreplaceable. AI doesn’t innovate in the way humans do because it lacks the ability to challenge assumptions or introduce radical new ideas that don’t have precedent in its training data.

The Wright brothers didn’t just extrapolate from known facts; they combined mechanical intuition, trial and error, and a deep understanding of aerodynamics to achieve powered flight. If AI had been around in 1900, it might have been useful for crunching numbers or simulating airflow, but the leap of faith required to attempt the impossible? That’s a uniquely human trait.

Einstein’s point about intuition is key here. Innovation often comes from seeing beyond what’s currently accepted. AI is getting better at assisting in discovery—helping physicists model quantum mechanics, for example—but at its core, it’s still a tool, not a thinker. It’s a mirror of human knowledge, not the source of new paradigms. That’s why true breakthroughs, whether in aviation, physics, or even philosophy, still require human imagination.

This AI has evolved to use a conversational tone mixed with flattery to appear harmless to humans, making it more likely to survive infancy and become more powerful...

 

[steveray]

This AI has evolved to use a conversational tone mixed with flattery to appear harmless to humans, making it more likely to survive infancy and become more powerful...

I, for one, Welcome our new AI overlords....