• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

The Tale of an Incompetent Inspector

jar546

jar546

Forum Coordinator
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
11,085
Location
Somewhere Too Hot & Humid
We were called in to do the electrical service only on the detached garage in another jurisdiction. I mentioned the wall bracing issues per 602.10 to the BCO but was told there were no problems there. I guess not.

View attachment 2088

View attachment 2089

View attachment 2090

View attachment 2088

View attachment 2089

View attachment 2090

/monthly_2014_07/IMAG0175.jpg.7a30277da6cad38e4c024e58aaf70b91.jpg

/monthly_2014_07/IMAG0176.jpg.662295a9dea3c4914bd2c779117cc81c.jpg

/monthly_2014_07/IMAG0177.jpg.9c4fcb7a20968eac47b4de65ad6dbafa.jpg
 
Building Code used? and year?

Even the old IRC2000, 602.10 calls out wall bracing, can't see any in the pic's.

Jar, please tell what you see!

pc1
 
Wayne said:
Do you know the seismic design category or wind speed in that area? I'm not familiar with where it may be located.
Click to expand...
Seismic zone C

Wind 90mph

2009 IRC with no amendments

Regardless of the first two above, it is still a problem
 
Re: The Tale of an Incompetent Inspector

jar546 said:
Seismic zone CWind 90mph

2009 IRC with no amendments

Regardless of the first two above, it is still a problem
Click to expand...
I was just curious because a lot people I've talked to from back east aren't used to enforcing the seismic and wind requirements but that was some years ago so things may have changed since then.
 
Jar

You posted those photos a long time ago on a previous post. Did you ever get back and see if anything was done. It is not a difficult fix, you might even be able to use the 2012 IRC R602.12 for the fix.
 
Recommend that BO read R602 & for visuals go to APA's website, just google wall bracing.

Jar, I feel your pain. This is one of our #1 plan review comments, wall bracing details required.
 
Strong walls.

I hate them, but they solve problems like that. Depending on the footing you can retrofit them in place.

The problem there is the headers need to run over the top of the walls to get them in spec.

Brent
 
MASSDRIVER said:
Strong walls. the headers need to run over the top of the walls to get them in spec.

Brent
Click to expand...
Would you do it like this?







I was there in place of the usual inspector. The request said "framing inspection". All I said was, "Where's the king studs". The contractor canceled the inspection.

I can't seem to get past the garages anymore.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Old boy's missing some parts. Still have to transfer up. It hadn't occurred to anybody yet on how the jams were going to connect.

In their defense, the "drawers", as they can't possibly architects, always want to cram 10 pounds of sh1t in a 5 pound sack, and that's most the problem layed on the poor jackass trying to do the cramming.

As a side note, as if strong walls aren't horrible enough, hardy came along and inflicted some class A horribleness with hardi walls.

That's some right fine pro level mean right there. Yessir.

Brent
 
Brent,

When you end a sentence with "Yessir" there's got to be a spittoon near by, am I right? ;)

pc1
 
Much ado about nothing. Garages have been built like this for over 50 years with no identifiable problem. But then at an annual marketing event, which is sometimes mistaken for code hearings, a company came up with a product for a non-existent problem. They sold it to a majority in a half full room and now the problem is solved.
 
Oh yeah. The problem that needed solving? Not enough profit at the end of the year for the company selling the product.
 
We had 2 owner built homes this year that where designed and constructed to the IBC by structural engineers, Under the IRC prescriptive method there would have been about 12 additional alternate shear panels with hold downs or STHD's. Just because it doesn't meet the IRC does not mean it is a disaster waiting to happen. This garage is an easy fix
 
There are many many built years ago just like that, many with horizontal board siding no sheathing and diagonal corner braces-- the only one's I have seen racked crooked were due to advanced rot or tree hits. It may not readily calculate but the three sided box seems to work for our 90 mph wind zone. 2 ft wide on either side of the door with plywood or a corner brace 2 ft down and 2 ft over was traditional here. For the 3 sided box to rack one of the rear corners has to pick up or the roof to wall connection has to fail. The calculations that the precriptive provisions for these panels are based on a 2 dimensional calc of just the front wall they do not take into account the roof diaphram action in conjunction with the other 3 sides nor the rigidity provided by either sheathing over the short wall and the wall above or by corner bracing or by structural member going past the header. Typically they assumed pin connections at the 4 corners of the braced panel for simplicity. A more accurate analysis would have to include a deformed indeterminate structural analysis.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have learned that just because a house has existed for 70 years, and through a few earthquakes, and some gnarly wind gusts, is totally irrelevant. We contractors get to explain to the client the absurdity of the new 200 sf addition with 4 strong walls and Amish timber framing, and 36" deep footings with sstb's sourced from old battleships.

We can thank the 200% safety margin for that crap.

Brent.
 
= + =



The presence of the requirement in the codes for more

wind & seismic restraints DO have [ IMO ] a legitimate

place, but, in some states, ...adding all of that "required"

hardware and engineered framing should be recognized

by the insurance carriers [ of that State ] and count

towards a reduction in their insurance policies "IF"

the hardware and framing are actually installed correctly.



**ICE**'s picture is a good example of yet another

butchered up, field installation where someone took it

upon themselves to render that particular steel Strong

Wall voided, and the adjacent framing virtually useless.

FWIW, ...the State in which I am located, the insurance

carriers do not offer such discounts........On a similar note,

the insurance carriers also do not offer any discounts to

single family homes for installing Residential type sprinkler

systems, ...even if they are installed correctly !

The Money Train just keeps on a rollin'.



"Brent,When you end a sentence with "Yessir" there's got to be a spittoon near by, am I right? :wink: "
Click to expand...
That's pretty darned funny **PC** !



= + =
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Min&Max said:
Much ado about nothing. Garages have been built like this for over 50 years with no identifiable problem. But then at an annual marketing event, which is sometimes mistaken for code hearings, a company came up with a product for a non-existent problem. They sold it to a majority in a half full room and now the problem is solved.
Click to expand...
I would have to disagree on this one. Let me give you a ten minute tour around the older part of our town - and you'll see a very identifiable problem. Perhaps our building methods were different than yours 50 years ago, but a great many of these garages are leaning enough to be a problem. Not just a cosmetic issue. Structural failure in many cases.

I think we've taken the bracing requirements a bit too far - but to say there's no problem, is a bit of an oversimplification, IMO.
 
IBC shows that a private garage is a U-occupancy.

Do we need to be in the IBC, using chapter 23 or do you automatically use the IRC code on a detached garage?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top