# Periodic Water Barrier Inspections.



## Joker (May 20, 2021)

Good Afternoon Building Officials. For those of you who have commercial riverfront property, how often does your city require structural inspections of the commercial seawalls, riprap, dikes etc. to ensure there's no collapse at the shoreline? We are considering making it every 5 years by a state licensed engineer hired by the property owner. We've reached out to the Army Corps of Engineers to see if we are on the right track and so far the reply is, "it’s up to you", which is no help at all.  Thanks in advance!


----------



## Pcinspector1 (May 20, 2021)

What's that gonna cost a property owner? or does anyone care?

I thought the corp had complete control of all the riverways?


----------



## cda (May 20, 2021)

I have no water,,,

Seems like there are a lot of agencies that sometimes have jurisdiction over these

Maybe start requiring it and see what happens??

Who decides when repairs are needed ?

Is there a problem in your area with deterioration?


----------



## Joker (May 20, 2021)

Thanks for the quick responses. We thought the Corp had jurisdiction. They do in issuing the permits. They're officially hands off when it comes to making sure the owner maintains the barrier. Eventually all water barriers deteriorate and every BO should be very aware of who's responsibility it is before its too late. I'll bet your Property Maintenance code makes it your problem (in general) since the seawall is a part of the property.


----------



## Keystone (May 20, 2021)

I’m trying to understand, the property owner owns the parcel which includes all or part of the sea wall, riprap, dikes and etc which then is likely to extend into the waterway???


----------



## Joker (May 20, 2021)

Pcinspector1 said:


> What's that gonna cost a property owner? or does anyone care?
> 
> I thought the corp had complete control of all the riverways?


I care as much as I care about how much a wall report costs for a 5+ story building or a boiler inspection. It's a business expense that hopefully keeps very bad things from happening. You can replace your brake pads now or wait a week and replace pads, calipers rotors, etc. IF you're lucky.


----------



## Keystone (May 20, 2021)

What is the age of the seawalls, etc..... currently in place?

What is the life expectancy of those seawalls, etc...

Do you have FEMA data that documents increased or decreased its flood plain rating for this river?

If an inspection program is put into action, my preliminary take would be;
-Inspection required within 3 years from start date of program.
-Thereafter inspections required at change of ownership.


----------



## Joker (May 20, 2021)

Keystone said:


> I’m trying to understand, the property owner owns the parcel which includes all or part of the sea wall, riprap, dikes and etc which then is likely to extend into the waterway???


Example: Your waterfront property has a seawall or riprap separating your land( Grass, asphalt, concrete, etc.) from the water. It should be evaluated on a regular basis to ensure there's no failure. 








						Seawall, sidewalk fail at Zebra Lounge on Black River in Port Huron
					

The city of Port Huron has hired Tetra Tech of Michigan to engineer the repair of the failing seawall and collapsing sidewalk in front of the Bowl-O-Drome and Zebra Lounge




					www.voicenews.com


----------



## Keystone (May 20, 2021)

Joker said:


> Example: Your waterfront property has a seawall or riprap separating your land( Grass, asphalt, concrete, etc.) from the water. It should be evaluated on a regular basis to ensure there's no failure.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Gotcha.      Similar to retaining wall.


----------



## Joker (May 20, 2021)

Keystone said:


> What is the age of the seawalls, etc..... currently in place?
> 
> What is the life expectancy of those seawalls, etc...
> 
> ...


Unfortunately, I don't have any data on the age or life expectancy of the barriers. FEMA did increase the flood plain rating in some areas from 500 to 100 years.  Thanks for the comments.


----------



## cda (May 20, 2021)

Have you checked to see if any state agency has ahj also??


----------



## JCraver (May 20, 2021)

We have a lake, so I really can't compare that to a river.  FWIW we don't require any sort of inspections for seawalls / riprap after the one I do on initial installation, but we also don't permit any building (except for docks) below 10 feet above normal pool.  

Interesting thread / question.  I'm curious what all of the answers are going to be.


----------



## Mark K (May 20, 2021)

What a can of  worms.

Do you have any objective criteria that would compel action? Do your building codes recognize this criteria?    How much distress is too much?

If another entity issues permits for the design and construction how can you have jurisdiction?  The property maintenance code is a stretch.

If the failure of these walls really creates a problem that impacts more than the individual property the issues could be treated as a public nuisance and litigated in the courts..

I suggest that your department has too much tine on its hands.


----------



## cda (May 20, 2021)

Mark K said:


> What a can of  worms.
> 
> Do you have any objective criteria that would compel action? Do your building codes recognize this criteria?    How much distress is too much?
> 
> ...



Or a water way hazard/ problem


----------



## cda (May 20, 2021)

Joker said:


> Unfortunately, I don't have any data on the age or life expectancy of the barriers. FEMA did increase the flood plain rating in some areas from 500 to 100 years.  Thanks for the comments.



Do you inspect new ones???


----------



## Joker (May 20, 2021)

cda said:


> Have you checked to see if any state agency has ahj also??


They do not. They have jurisdiction over the schools and aren't on top of that. That's my job now.


----------



## Joker (May 20, 2021)

cda said:


> Do you inspect new ones???


If we were made aware of a new installation we'd probably require a 3rd party inspection at completion to ensure it was done right since ACE just issues the permits and allegedly doesn't inspect.


----------



## Joker (May 20, 2021)

Mark K said:


> What a can of  worms.
> 
> Do you have any objective criteria that would compel action? Do your building codes recognize this criteria?    How much distress is too much?
> 
> ...


With all due respect, I'm not speaking of new design, permit issuance, construction, etc. I'm speaking of barriers that are decades old, at the mercy of rising and lowering tides (erosion) and are subject to failure if left unattended just like any other structure that was built by man. Did you not see the article above? It's not a stretch by any means. If you have a property maintenance code based on the IPMC, it probably defines premises, exterior property, and speaks to grading and drainage to prevent the erosion of soil and the accumulation of stagnant water there on. I'll bet it also says a structure is defined as that which is built or constructed or portion thereof. You probably have a section that speaks to exterior structures and unsafe conditions that this matter will fall under. Maybe you have nothing that speaks to this at all and you're in the clear. Believe me, I have plenty of work to do and would love to not take this on. However, it is my responsibility and probably most of yours too if you have waterfront property. Ignore it if you want. You may get lucky. Maybe you won't. You've been warned.

Regards


----------



## Pcinspector1 (May 20, 2021)

What are you righting them up on? Do you have the IPMC adopted? 304.1.1?


----------



## Joker (May 20, 2021)

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323706367_Classification_of_seawalls_and_their_failure_An_overview
		


Causes of Seawall Failure Include:
_*i. Poor maintenance. *_
*ii. Lack of inspection to detect problems early. *
iii. Placing loads atop the soil supported by the seawall. 
iv. Shallow building foundations placed too close to the wall. 
v. Changing water flow and trapping large quantities of water behind seawall. 
vi. Changing cover depth of anchor system, which diminishes seawall the anchor’s 
capacity.
vii. Raising elevation and load beyond seawall design limits. 
viii. Driving heavy vehicles and/or equipment too close to seawall. 
ix. Using materials that can’t withstand harsh, corrosive marine environments. 
x. *Corrosive Nature of Marine Environments.*


----------



## Joker (May 20, 2021)

Pcinspector1 said:


> What are you righting them up on? Do you have the IPMC adopted? 304.1.1?


Ours is based on the 2003 version of the IMPC. I'm currently asking for a 3rd party inspection and repairs of noted items with the following sections: 
(Paraphrase)
The Director of the Building Department and the
Public Health Director are authorized to engage, subject to any approvals required by the Charter or by City Code, such expert opinion as deemed necessary to report upon unusual or technical issues that arise as a result of any inspection or re-inspection.

Exterior walls.
All building and structure exterior walls shall be free from breaks, holes, and loose or rotting materials, and
shall be maintained weatherproof and properly surface coated, where required, to prevent deterioration.

The new ordinance being proposed is suggesting an inspection every 5 years by a 3rd party. That's why I'm reaching out to BO's to see what is being done elsewhere if anything.


----------



## Keystone (May 20, 2021)

Is the seawall or similar positively part of the owners responsibility,  in terms of conveying with deed, shown on plot plan as complete ownership? Or is this part of an easement or some other avenue? What does the zoning Official have to say, is that another hat you must wear? 

 IMO, 5 years is onerous and unreasonable without substantial evidence of failures.  This is in a 100year flood plain, a single owner will not own a property longer then 100 years nor will the likely hold of a 100 year event. Hence my suggestion of inspection at change of ownership.


----------



## Joker (May 20, 2021)

Keystone said:


> Is the seawall or similar positively part of the owners responsibility,  in terms of conveying with deed, shown on plot plan as complete ownership? Or is this part of an easement or some other avenue? What does the zoning Official have to say, is that another hat you must wear?
> 
> IMO, 5 years is onerous and unreasonable without substantial evidence of failures.  This is in a 100year flood plain, a single owner will not own a property longer then 100 years nor will the likely hold of a 100 year event. Hence my suggestion of inspection at change of ownership.


 The seawall in most cases is the owners responsibility. We are not involved with the conveying of property and our code is silent on that. We've had failures. Zoning (also my hat) is for new uses/developments. I respect your opinion that 5 years is bad. However, if we go with inspection only upon change of ownership on a 50-65 year-old structure, AND the owner has no intention of selling, we could still end up in a bad situation. Did I mention that all of my riverfront was industrial for decades (like some of you) with varying levels of contamination? Yeah. That too.


----------



## Joe.B (May 20, 2021)

It sounds to me like a periodic inspection at the property owners expense is not unreasonable at all. They might complain, but if spending a little money on regular inspections can save a property from serious damage, that's money well spent. A 3rd party inspection every 5 years is not unreasonable, IMO. "An ounce of prevention..."


----------



## ICE (May 20, 2021)

Here in California the penalty for polluting a waterway is probably more than an inspection.

I have no experience with seawalls.  I have experience with miles of leaning cmu fences.  They usually fail in slow motion.  That affords time to intervene.  I can imagine that a seawall could start slow and accelerate to a mess.  Unless an imminent failure would be a life safety concern a relaxed approach might be prudent. Survey on your own and alert the owners of any problems.

Ask the Army Corps of Engineers to inspect… or at least educate you on seawalls. If they balk tell them that the Marines have offered to help.


----------



## Joker (May 21, 2021)

ICE said:


> Here in California the penalty for polluting a waterway is probably more than an inspection.
> 
> I have no experience with seawalls.  I have experience with miles of leaning cmu fences.  They usually fail in slow motion.  That affords time to intervene.  I can imagine that a seawall could start slow and accelerate to a mess.  Unless an imminent failure would be a life safety concern a relaxed approach might be prudent. Survey on your own and alert the owners of any problems.
> 
> Ask the Army Corps of Engineers to inspect… or at least educate you on seawalls. If they balk tell them that the Marines have offered to help.


I appreciate the feedback. Finding qualified people isn't a problem. Having tax payers foot the bill to hire that qualified person to survey miles of private property would be an issue. Same goes for ACE/Marines. This is the property owners responsibility in my opinion and no different(responsibility and pubic safety wise)  than a highrise wall or boiler inspection. It's a necessary expense.


----------



## Pcinspector1 (May 21, 2021)

Should consider a 50/50 match of funds like some city's do with the required city sidewalk in the Right-of-Way that the property owner has to maintain. You make the property owner shovel the sidewalk don't you, that's in the IPMC? You make them fix sidewalk trip hazards don't you? Do you have a sidewalk inspection program?

Does your State have grant or funds available for shoreline infrastructure?

Does the Biden infrastructure bill have funds for shoreline repair, has that been discussed by your state and federal legislature? 

Does your city benefit by having the seawall repaired?


----------



## Joker (May 21, 2021)

Pcinspector1 said:


> Should consider a 50/50 match of funds like some city's do with the required city sidewalk in the Right-of-Way that the property owner has to maintain. You make the property owner shovel the sidewalk don't you, that's in the IPMC? You make them fix sidewalk trip hazards don't you? Do you have a sidewalk inspection program?
> 
> Does your State have grant or funds available for shoreline infrastructure?
> 
> ...


Sidewalks are the owners responsibility and we deal with them when we get complaints or see it not shoveled in the winter. Everybody benefits from the repair even though some of it is vacant industrial land. Biden Bucks, 50/50 matches, Grants, etc. are above my pay grade and out of my lane. I just enforce.


----------



## Mark K (May 21, 2021)

I do not believe all inspectors are lousy.

The current situation is not ideal and this results in problems.  The problems are related to the reality that we are dealing with people

Building inspectors are put in an impossible situation, expected to find all violations in little time.  No  one person can know all of the things that individual inspectors are  often expected to know.  But at the same time some individuals are unwilling to admit that the may be imperfect.

Building inspectors do not have the  training of engineers and architects and thus may not understand the  reasons for code provisions and thus take actions which are problematic.  This is made worse when the building department does not have inhouse engineers and architects to  support the inspectors.  All too often building inspectors operate with little to no supervision.  Are we  then surprised when some inspectors go rogue.

Some contractors believe that because they have built some buildings that they know better than engineers what is needed.  Some building inspectors make the same mistake and believe that because they have seen a lot of things they know what is needed.  If we take this attitude to its illogical conclusion there would be no need for engineers since  contractors and inspectors know it all.  This attitude is mostly seen in contractors  who work on small, often residential, buildings.  This  attitude is not seen in big building contractors.

Building inspectors play a role in building code enforcement but we have problems when they do not understand the limits of their  role or the limits of their knowledge..


----------



## Joker (May 21, 2021)

Mark K said:


> I do not believe all inspectors are lousy.
> 
> The current situation is not ideal and this results in problems.  The problems are related to the reality that we are dealing with people
> 
> ...


Valid Points.  

"_A man's GOT to know his limitations"_
 Dirty-Harry Callahan


----------



## jar546 (May 24, 2021)

My jurisdiction is a barrier island with the Atlantic Ocean on one side and the intracoastal waterway on the other.  We have a lot of seawalls and they are always being repaired, replaced or newly installed.  Almost all of the intracoastal side is a seawall except where there are deep mangroves but we only have a few on the ocean side.  All seawalls for us are reviewed by P&Z then get peer reviewed by an engineering firm of our choice before a permit is issued.  Pilings are usually the only thing that requires a special inspection, all inspections are performed by the inspectors, not engineer unless it is part of a special inspection or the designing engineer requires it.  

When it comes to maintenance, the town takes that very seriously and can even withhold the issuance of a roof permit if you seawall is in disrepair.  We will often require a letter from an engineer if they don't agree with our finding.  The problem is that is it easy to find an engineer willing to sign off on an older seawall because money talks.  That just happened recently.  We don't have an inspection program but if there is a complaint from a resident or we see it with our own eyes (code compliance) then a letter is sent out.  The seawalls are on private property so we don't regulate them with required periodic inspections.


----------



## Mark K (May 24, 2021)

If the seawall was originally permitted by a different entity, such as Corps of Engineers, I do not see how provisions in the IPMC can now give the local building department jurisdiction.

The IBC was never intended to address seawall structures. This is evidenced by the lack of any technical provisions addressing such structures. Unless a building is resting on the seawall or is connected to the seawall, I suggest the scope in the IBC could not be relied upon. But we still have the question of what are the technical standards. If the code contains no criteria, how can you enforce criteria?

The 5-year reinspection frequency appears overly aggressive. What is the age of seawalls in the jurisdiction and other nearby jurisdictions when they tend to show signs of distress? Also, what percentage of the seawalls are perceived as having problems. My guess is that an evidence-based approach would not support a 5-year reinspection frequency.

Why not have a 5 year reinspection program for exterior decks  and exterior stairs?

The question should be asked if other jurisdictions that have these seawalls are not imposing an inspection program what makes your jurisdiction antique?

If you do require inspections then what criteria should be used? The inspection provisions in the IBC would be totally inadequate to identify structural distress.

Inspections when they occur should be performed by an engineer who will be better able to evaluate the significance of cracks in the concrete or tilting of the wall. For example, movement of the wall which does not suggest reduction in capacity may be of little concern. Building inspectors or Contractors do not have the training to access these issues.

A building department that takes exception with an inspection report by an engineer should have first reviewed the report by an inhouse engineer or an engineer they retained to review the reports. But again what is the criteria to be used in evaluating the report.

Remember if there is significant distress that impacts neighboring properties the law of public nuisances will likely allow the issue to be resolved without involving the building department.


----------



## jar546 (May 24, 2021)

Mark K said:


> If the seawall was originally permitted by a different entity, such as Corps of Engineers, I do not see how provisions in the IPMC can now give the local building department jurisdiction.
> 
> The IBC was never intended to address seawall structures. This is evidenced by the lack of any technical provisions addressing such structures. Unless a building is resting on the seawall or is connected to the seawall, I suggest the scope in the IBC could not be relied upon. But we still have the question of what are the technical standards. If the code contains no criteria, how can you enforce criteria?
> 
> ...


All seawalls, docks and boatlifts are required to be permitted by ACOE and FDEP before we will look at them.  Engineering review on our part is a necessity in order to issue a permit.  ACOE does not perform any inspections during construction, the local AHJ does.


----------



## Mark K (May 24, 2021)

So if you provide technical review of the seawall what code provisions address seawalls?  While I am of the understanding that there are standards for the design of seawalls I am not of the impression that any of them have been referenced by the IBC.  I assume we are still a country of laws.

Assuming that you have a report what is your basis for requiring something to be done to the seawalls.  You can only do this if there is evidence that the structure is no longer in compliance with the code used in the original permit.

Putting aside the question of authority, any jurisdiction wishing to undertake the proposed inspection program needs to have an expertise that practically no building department has.


----------



## Joker (May 28, 2021)

Mark K said:


> If the seawall was originally permitted by a different entity, such as Corps of Engineers, I do not see how provisions in the IPMC can now give the local building department jurisdiction.
> 
> The IBC was never intended to address seawall structures. This is evidenced by the lack of any technical provisions addressing such structures. Unless a building is resting on the seawall or is connected to the seawall, I suggest the scope in the IBC could not be relied upon. But we still have the question of what are the technical standards. If the code contains no criteria, how can you enforce criteria?
> 
> ...


You and I agree on a few things: The IBC isn't applicable in this matter and evaluations should be left up to the engineers. Not building inspectors or contractors. In my opinion the engineer should evaluate the water barrier to determine whether or not it is structurally sound and advise of any needed repairs.  Regarding the 5 year inspection intervals: Duly noted and that's why I reached out to this group.  I'd be open to a letter from I guess we need to agree to disagree on whether or not this falls under the IPMC or similar codes. You can call it a stretch if you want but in my opinion it's clear and very different from a homeowner not taking care of his deck or stairs. Again, we had a collapse, ACE isn't taking responsibility for maintenance inspections(if they aren't and the city doesn't, who should?) AND we don't know the age/condition of miles of water barriers.  The are 152 commercial properties that we've asked for an evaluation per our PM code and not one has challenged us on it. Some already have reports that are less than 5 years old and we accept it. Public nuisance actions don't occur without significant investigation/action by the building dept. AND it seems like you are proposing being reactive vs proactive. That sounds like it could lead other BO's into a situation like mine.  That's not good.


----------



## Mark K (May 28, 2021)

Public nuance actions  do not need to involve the  building department.

The fact that ACE is not  taking responsibility does not allow you to exercise authority.  If they have jurisdiction what allows you to usurp their authority.

The fact that there have been no challenges does not mean  you are doing it  right.  They might be ignorant as to what are their rights.  

If you  believe that repairs need to be made and we agree the IBC does not apply what standards will apply?   I  do not believe the property maintenance code provides those standards.


----------



## Joker (May 28, 2021)

Mark K said:


> Public nuance actions  do not need to involve the  building department.
> *In my city it does. A lawyer knows how to take a legal action against a property owner. They need a subject matter expert (inspector/building official) to sign an affidavit that something is wrong with the property. *





Mark K said:


> *Lawyers know nothing about building or PM codes and they are going to rely(if they are smart) on someone who does it everyday. *
> The fact that ACE is not  taking responsibility does not allow you to exercise authority.  If they have jurisdiction what allows you to usurp their authority. *Again, ACE is saying they aren't the authority in making sure folks are maintaining their barriers. To recap...the feds, state and county are all saying "Not Me". Who is going to protect the citizens of my city from property owners who don't maintain their water barriers? Any BO with waterfront property would be wise to find out who is the AHJ on this subject or they could be very sorry one day. *
> 
> The fact that there have been no challenges does not mean  you are doing it  right. *Good point.*  They might be ignorant as to what are their rights.
> ...


----------



## Mark K (May 29, 2021)

What I am hearing is that there is an injustice the building official is empowered to set it right.  I thought we were supposed to be a nation of laws.  

I am also hearing that there is no need for the legislature or the city council to adopt laws since the building official is autonomous.  When is the coronation to take place?


----------



## jar546 (May 29, 2021)

Mark K said:


> What I am hearing is that there is an injustice the building official is empowered to set it right.  I thought we were supposed to be a nation of laws.
> 
> I am also hearing that there is no need for the legislature or the city council to adopt laws since the building official is autonomous.  When is the coronation to take place?


The Building Official can only administer within the confines of the adopted codes, state statutes and local ordinances.  I don't believe that anyone would dispute that.  To assume that Building Officials are working outside of those confines on a regular basis would be pure ignorance.


----------



## Mark K (May 29, 2021)

While in most instances the plan checkers and inspectors do not appear to be operating outside of their authority this does happen.  While not the majority, rogue plan checkers and inspectors do exist and such behavior is offensive and can be disruptive to the project. 

It is my belief that rogue plan checkers and inspectors have a negative impact on the quality of the designs and the construction.  In addition requiring things not required by the adopted laws increases delays the project and increases the cost of construction.  I would hope that we all would want a predictable process.

Building officials should exercise some leadership and make it clear that such behavior is not acceptable.  Too often I fear that building officials are intentionally blind to this behavior.


----------



## Joker (May 30, 2021)

Mark K said:


> What I am hearing is that there is an injustice the building official is empowered to set it right.  I thought we were supposed to be a nation of laws.
> 
> I am also hearing that there is no need for the legislature or the city council to adopt laws since the building official is autonomous.  When is the coronation to take place?






Mark K said:


> *Mark, You're not hearing that at all. I don't do anything that I can't point to an Ordinance(and/or state law) adopted by Council giving me authority to do so. I've pointed to our PM code at least 2x's in this thread.  I can see we won't agree on this one. I'm done.*


----------

