# Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections



## conarb (Feb 20, 2010)

I visited a carpenter of mine doing the framing on a new Woodside home, the inspector was making one of his framing inspections for a few hours, he was making the carpenter pull designated nails to show him, then he would measure the withdrawn nail then order it replaced. Almost everything he inspected in the end he would write up an order that it be further inspected by the Structural Engineer with a letter approving it for the Town's records, obviously throwing all liability from the town to the engineer.  The contractor is keeping a good photographic record of his progress on the home.  He sent me an E-mail this morning:





			
				E-mail said:
			
		

> Thanks for coming out to the job site and the advice. I did contact the GC and have him contact the EOR for all of the unconstructable engineering. Most of them are being resolved now and the EOR is coming out Monday to look at the rest of the items that I say are unconstructable.  After the third straight day of building inspections, the building inspector said the building is one of the most complex houses structurally that he has inspected. Now I don’t feel so bad about not getting the roof and shear passed on the first try. I also asked him about the amount of hardware in the building and he said that the 2007 CBC structural engineering requirements are 10 fold of the 2001 CBC structural engineering requirements for some soil conditions.
> 
> The building inspector will come out for 1 hour a day all next week to inspect the rest of the shear and roof nailing and the hardware. That will be 8 straight days of inspections.  That’s un-heard of except in commercial framing.
> 
> Got to go out in the garage and find my mirror on a stick that I promised the building inspector. So he can see all 800 A35 clips.


Here is a partial list of Simpson hardware:





> Quick list of some of the hardware installed, he figured $30,000 but now figures that the hardware is going to run $35,000.120 holdownds... 16 more to install
> 
> 250 MST27 - MST72 straps
> 
> ...


I just thought I'd share with you guys what's being done to keep building inspectors working in the late, great, State of California.


----------



## Pcinspector1 (Feb 20, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

conarb,

Sounds like there's another gold rush in CA., We should all buy stock in metal connector companies!

I hope after all the connectors are installed that the projects standing after the mud slide or earthquake!


----------



## RJJ (Feb 20, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

I believe Tor egg has a new stock release coming soon! :lol:


----------



## conarb (Feb 20, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing InspectionsA guy is trying to hire me as a consultant on a new $15 million dollar home he is starting on the ocean, it's taken 16 years to get his approvals and it's probably the last large home to receive approval from the California Coastal Commission, he's been fighting the "Greenies" for all these years.  Note the lumber acclimation procedures they are mixing engineered lumber with sawn lumber, that's the reason for the drying conditions; there are, by my calculations, 144,000 board feet of lumber to be milled in Canada, all I can see is temporary metal buildings on the site to meet the drying, stickering, and acclimation requirements, yet getting a permit for those temporary structures may be a problem in and of itself. (click on images to enlarge)notes2.png[/attachment:2hrl3ikp]Here is a snapshot of one of the dozens of steel frames in the walls.notes1.png[/attachment:2hrl3ikp]

View attachment 77


View attachment 78


View attachment 77


View attachment 78


/monthly_2010_06/notes2.png.71702f1081b33c041f17beb02f09ab94.png

/monthly_2010_06/notes1.png.63be42fabb969b7ed60d0275145af991.png


----------



## Uncle Bob (Feb 20, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

ConArb,

That's why everyone is moving out of California.  You could build the same house in Oklahoma for less than 1/3 of the price; and this clown (Building Inspector) would come by and be amazed at what your building;

"A provisional Inspector's license is issued to allow a person to work as an inspector even though all (or none of) the license qualifications have not been met. This provisional license will provide the licensee with adequate time and motivation to become educated and meet all licensure requirements within two years  after being issued the provisional license."

(click on Chapter 60 - Inspectors and scroll down to; 158:60-5-2. Qualifications for inspector licensure)

http://www.ok.gov/cib/Rules_and_Regulations/index.html

That's right; never seen a code book; and, a State Licensed Inspector for two years without any knowledge, experience, and/or training; and yes, I have seen them and talked to them.

From the Oklahoma Construction Industry Board that issues state licenses for Inspectors.  No training, no Certifications, no experience.

I'm finding that a lot of municipalities are hiring unqualified applicants as Inspectors for two years and then they have to find a job at WalMart.

Uncle Bob


----------



## RJJ (Feb 21, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

It seems that the big O has some top notch regulations!


----------



## jim baird (Feb 22, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

Sounds like fun ca.  Are you going to get on the boat?


----------



## beach (Feb 23, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

Conarb,

What's the square footage of the houses you are referring too?


----------



## conarb (Feb 23, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

Beach:

I haven't attempted to calculate it, the owner says various agencies he is dealing with have all calculated it differently, anywhere from 11,000 to 15,000, I suppose the big difference is whether garages and horse stalls are included, or just human living area. 

On the one I linked with the 7 straight days of inspections it appears to be about 4 to 5,000. Note that Sim has a few more pictures starting here, he refers to waiting for more inspections.


----------



## jim baird (Feb 24, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

My review of the pics leads me to award this house the prize for Ugly with a capital U.

I realize my opinion reflects my lack of sophistication and lack of appreciation for displays of money minus taste.  On the other hand I think the project gets a P for profligacy.   :roll:      :roll:


----------



## D a v e W (Feb 24, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

UB

Is that correct? They require 6 hours CEU per year, per trade or 6 total for BMEP? Thats extremely crazy, when you only receive .7 for a day of ICC training. So, if I read that right you will have 34.29 days of required training if attending ICC training.  :shock: No wonder after two year the inspectors leave for Walmart  :lol: I really hope I understood that incorrectly, WOW!


----------



## conarb (Mar 2, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

Sim has now had the structural engineer provide the revised details for the additional work as requested by the inspector, and this is a first for me, he has hired a structural engineer who is also a carpenter to do the revised work and thoroughly document everything he has done in an effort to get this frame signed off and attempt to collect the extra money for the extra work as required by the inspector.

BTW, when I was there I heard the inspector tell Sim that this was the best framing he had ever seen.


----------



## Uncle Bob (Mar 2, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

Dave,

That's 6 (real time only) for each; which would mean four, six hour classes (24 hrs. per year); for all four catagories.  I haven't found very many Inspectors with license for all four catagories.

I'm hoping that the new State-wide code adoption will increase the available training for Inspectors.

There is hope; and that's enough for me to get involved.

ConArb,

Sounds like the Inspector knows his/her stuff; or the builder wouldn't have to make the corrections.

Uncle Bob


----------



## conarb (Mar 2, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

Uncle Bob:

Here is something on the inspector.  I was there on the first day of frame inspection, he thoroughly counted and measured shear nailing, had specified nails pulled to look at and measure, requested manufacturers' information on Hardy Frames, and in the end did a lot of write-ups, I looked at his write-ups, every one at that point approved what he was inspecting and at the end requested an inspection and approval letter from the engineer for the town's files. It was in subsequent daily inspections that he started challenging the engineer.


----------



## conarb (Mar 13, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

At this point I have to wonder what power the inspector has under the I Codes?  He is now requiring the engineer to place a Simpson piece of metal at each and every horizontal (or pitched roof) attachment to a vertical wall, under our old UBC based codes the AHJ was more than happy to see an engineers' seal, all they did was follow the calculations through looking for calculation errors and ascertain that the engineer was working within generally accepted engineering guidelines.  This inspector found little (if anything) at plan check, but during framing inspection is constantly requiring the engineer to add metal. 

I looked his authority up in the CBC (IBC) and all I find is:





			
				2007 CBC said:
			
		

> *1601A.3 Enforcement agency approval.* In addition to the requirements of California Code of Regulations (C.C.R.) Title 24, Parts 1 and 2, any aspect of project design, construction, quality assurance or quality control programs for which this code requires approval by the design professional are also subject to approval by the enforcement agency.


 That leaves everything wide open, are there any other CBC/IBC/IRC sections that give an inspector the power to tell the engineer what to do? The home owner is refusing to pay for more engineering, the contractor is saying he is going to pull off if he isn't paid for all these extra requirements not in the plans and specifications, are the I Codes now giving the inspectors this much discretion to add anything they want?  The inspector has complimented the contractor on the quality of his workmanship, it's the constant adding or engineered connections that has become the problem.


----------



## Uncle Bob (Mar 14, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

ConArb,

Tell your friend to call him on it.  Ask for code section for the additional requirements; not "because I said so".  Making him mad is not going to hurt if he's already requiring nails to be pulled to measure them.  Sounds like  the Inspector doesn't know the codes and making up stuff as he goes.  I'm not aware of any inspection rights a Building Official or Inspector has to do a destructive inspection; "without cause"; like pulling nails.  He needs to show cause before he asks you to pull nails.

Can an Inspector in California require a plumber to cut out a soldered copper fitting and  cut it open to inspect whether or not the fitting joint is completely filled all the way around the joint with solder?  There is nothing I know of that prohibits an Inspector from showing up during construction and observe installations.  If he wants to know how long the nails are; he can show up while your driving them.

Next time he shows up; meet him with a camcorder; and record his inspection.  Also nothing in the codes that I'm aware of; requires you to talk to the inspector or even answer any questions.

I stopped by a foundation pour (monolithic slab); and saw 8" anchor bolts being put in; and wrote them up for "anchor bolts too short" and gave the code section; but, I couldn't have waited until the slab hardened and had them dig an anchor bolt up so I could measure it.

If your friend thinks the Inspector is screwing with you; call him on it.  Checking his Certifications will give you an idea of what he knows or doesn't know about the codes.

Not saying the Inspector is wrong; just that your friend has the right to call him on the requirements.

Uncle Bob


----------



## conarb (Mar 14, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

Thanks Uncle Bob, as you can see he's a new guy, when I was there he is quite young looking, I think he's probably a good guy who doesn't know he's overstepping his bounds, is there a code section that says that an inspector can be required to write down a code section, or is that just common practice? 

 BTW, in this same little town Steve Jobs just got a court order to force the town to issue a demolition permit to tear down an old home and build a new one, he's been fighting for 30 years to get permission to do this, he's received court orders to force the town to issue a permit before only to have other groups file lawsuits getting injunctions enjoining the town from issuing permits.  We'll see if he actually gets the permit this time or another group sues.

I don't think this inspector is a bad guy, I think he's new, impressed with his power, and trying to do his best, but is stepping way over his bounds.  Usually it's better to just go along with what they want, but this is getting way out of hand, nobody wants the home stopped for years to go to court, and theoretically the contractor and engineer are getting paid for all this extra work, the one hurt is the homeowner having to pay, but if the owner doesn't pay what can be done but shut the home down


----------



## peach (Mar 14, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

It's ugly that's for sure!    

The inspector's job is not to guarantee construction; only that when he was there the minimum code and adherence to plans is being done... a snapshot in time.

sounds like he's acting as the superintendent..  or he has way too much time on his hands..


----------



## fatboy (Mar 14, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

Sounds more like he is designing.........and inspecting. Dangerous waters. This guy has way too much time on his hands, he has to answer to somebody.......maybe a call to the next link in the chain of command?


----------



## Coug Dad (Mar 14, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

I wonder if there should be a mechanism to charge the AHJ for cost they incur on a project when they mandate a feature that is not required by the code.  Someone has to pay for it.  The owner generally strong arms the cost from the contractor or design team.  The majority of people in this field try to do a good job and actively try to learn new things and keep up on the  changes in technology.  There are a few, however, who will not learn but will apply arbritary requirements that cost everyone money and time.  Similary, AHJ's should have the ability to charge additional fees to DP's who continue to submit wrong drawings.  Seattle instituted such a provision and it really made the DP's clean up their acts.


----------



## conarb (Mar 16, 2010)

Re: Eight Straight Days of Residential Framing Inspections

I took Uncle Bobby's advice, the only thing that I can see the inspector doing is relying upon 1601A.3 and placing himself on an equal footing with the Structural Engineer:





			
				2007 CBC said:
			
		

> 1601A.3 Enforcement agency approval. In addition to the requirements of California Code of Regulations (C.C.R.) Title 24, Parts 1 and 2, any aspect of project design, construction, quality assurance or quality control programs for which this code requires approval by the design professional are also subject to approval by the enforcement agency.


Since the inspector isn't challenging any of Sim's work but just the engineering, I told him not to alienate the inspector, but to tell him when he arrives for more framing inspections tomorrow to tell him that he isn't being paid for all this extra work, he's talked to his attorney about suing the general contractor, the structural engineer, and the owner for the cost of all the extra work not on the plans he bid, and to tell him that his attorney has asked him to ask the inspector to please cite the code sections on every write up to bolster his legal case to get paid.  The inspector should realize that if there is litigation over all of this that the town will be drawn in.  If he asks the town attorney he/she will probably ask him what the Hell he's doing.


----------



## conarb (Apr 10, 2010)

Okay, I went back through this entire thread and edited down the font sizes to fit this forum, just for Uncle Bob. 

The framing contractor pulled off the job until the structural engineer and the inspector could iron out their differences, I E-mailed him, and asked him how things were going, here is his reply:





> The structural plans  had to be redrawn and submitted to the city for plan review. Hopefully, we  should get the revised set of structural plans back from the city early next  week so we can finish the exterior siding. I was on the Woodside Friday with the  EOR when he was doing his structural walk thru for the basement and he told me  that Curtis the Woodside building inspector is red tagging his other job in  Woodside every other week.  The home owner on that job is ready to shoot Curtis  with a gun. The EOR also told me that Curtis has been the Woodside building  inspector for the last 7 years and only started acting like this about a year  ago. I bet it was right after he got his building inspector cert.


The inspector approved the plans as drawn initially, does something happen to an inspector when he gets his certs?  In case any have not seen the project here it is again, and the inspector has complimented the framer on the quality of his work, it's just the engineering in question.


----------



## Uncle Bob (Apr 11, 2010)

Thanks, ConArb,

I can read the normal print alright, I have my screen on 125%. I can see a golf ball on the ground 200 yds. away; but, can't find it at my feet.  

When we inspectors study for our certs; we discover that we didn't know the codes; and that realization becomes an embarassment I guess; so, we go overboard in the other direction; being armed with stuff we should have known before we got the job.

Sometimes our learning hurts the contractors and sometimes it helps them. I remember being conserned about five foot high sheetrock stacks in the middle of second floor bedrooms. I did some research and found that it either bowed the TJI's out of shape or the fasteners popped when the stack was removed and caused the flooring to loosen.

If anyone is curious; you'll find it's a no-no; on the Gypsum Association website and in BSCI 1-03, BCSI-B4 Construction loading. The maximum height for gypsum stacks is 12".

Doesn't sound too important until you find out that the Truss company has been losing money; going back to repair the floors after the home was sold. When I told them what I had learned; they started taking pictures of the stacks and then charged the builder for any repairs caused by the gypsum overload. When I left my old job in Texas it was nice to see 12" stacks throughout the second floor. Every little bit does help. I hope they miss me; in a good way.

My old signature; "The less you know, the easier your job is." is true for inspectors. Everybody is hiring unqualified inspectors over those that know what their looking at; it's cheaper and doesn't upset the bad builders. Rome is falling down around us; and nobody gives a flying fig. It's getting hard to watch; and even worse that knowledge is considered a bad thing, by the leaders of our communities.

Glad your friend is getting something done; and, he has a right to charge for changes caused by errors not of his making.

Uncle Bob


----------



## conarb (Apr 11, 2010)

Uncle Bob:  Thanks you for your reasonable response.  First, I actually way downsized the font size of my original posts in this thread, this started on the old forum where I had increased my fonts for readability, but in the new software they came through huge.  The thing that gets me here with this inspector is that he approved the plans as drawn, then started attacking the engineering at frame inspection (interestingly he didn't challenge the foundation design), we have always accepted the fact that just becasue an AHJ approves plans doesn't mean that they can't find problems they missed at plan check, that's reasonable since anyone can make mistakes, but to approve the plans at plan check and then come back at frame and demand that everything be re-engineered and redrawn seems too much:



			
				\ said:
			
		

> The structural plans had to be redrawn and submitted to the city for plan review


 If inspectors are going to do this I think they should be held to their approvals at plan checks.  Fortunately he isn't finding fault with the way the work is being done, just the engineering, can you imagine the problems if he was faulting both the engineering and the work?   .      I can see how the rock stacking started, in my day we used all sawn lumber for joists, I've stacked Sheetrock so high that the joists bowed down, but after installation they came right back up to their original crown-up position, going to these crummy I Joists is the problem.  Historically I always asked the stockers to pile the rock in stacks of 36 sheets high, or 30 with 5/8" rock, that gave us a good 18" high place to sit to eat lunch as well as a nice place to spread-out plans, but you can no-longer do that with I Joists.  Something is really goofy with this software this morning, I can't change font size, I can't break up into paragraphs and " marks are becoming &amp code.


----------



## High Desert (Apr 16, 2010)

I've been dropping in on the thread now and again to see how it's going. One thing I did notice was the "COWNews" or whatever it was had this statement in it.

"What we think that mouthful means is that Woodside just got a new properly qualified top building cop."

It appears that maybe he thinks he's a cop instead of a regulator.


----------



## conarb (Apr 16, 2010)

Now he's attacking the special inspector, I got this today:





> I had to tear off one  of my steel I-Beam nailers so Curtis could look at the welds. Now I might have  to tear down the building so the special inspection company, CTS, can perform a sonic  test on the welds.


Here is a copy of the Correction Notice note on the bottom that this is a large firm with several offices, does high-rise buildings etc.  For those interested here is the house again.


----------



## Yankee (Apr 16, 2010)

conarb said:
			
		

> Now he's attacking the special inspector, I got this today:
> 
> Here is a copy of the Correction Notice note on the bottom that this is a large firm with several offices, does high-rise buildings etc.  For those interested here is the house again.


I am confused. Why is the Special Inspector calling it "my steel I-Beam nailer"?


----------



## conarb (Apr 16, 2010)

Yankee:

The note to me is from the framing contractor, the city inspector made him remove the nailers bolted to the steel so he could check the welds, then wrote the Correction Notice.   Nailers like these.  Note that the special inspector even signed the steel.


----------



## Yankee (Apr 17, 2010)

It appears that the Special Inspector that signed off on a portion of the welding work signed off as compliant some part of the work that was NOT compliant with the structural steel specifications. If I noticed that a Special Inspector passed some work that didn't comply, I'd be worried also, and take measures to verify that the work was compliant which might include hiring a separate inspector or inspection agency if the problem was rampant.


----------



## TimNY (Apr 18, 2010)

It does sound like the inspector is correct.  Intermittent welds where they are to be continuous (sounds like it was just a failure to get the new details), inspectors not certified.. It doesn't seem complicated.

However, the contractor should not be on the hook financially for correcting (or having to expose) everybody elses mistakes.


----------



## conarb (Apr 18, 2010)

Yankee & Tim:

Thanks for your comments, you woke me up, I reviewed things and wrote the following questions to Sim (the framing contractor):



> Sim: Some  questions:
> 
> It appears that plans  were revised on 3/30/10 requiring a fillet weld connecting a stiffener, why  can't that just be done? The work was done and approved by the special inspector  on 12/22-24/09, I don't understand why the revised plans were dated after the  work was done?
> 
> ...


Would you believe that when I went to post this I got this message so I broke it up into two posts.





> The text that you have entered is too long (11232 characters). Please  shorten it to 10000 characters long.


----------



## conarb (Apr 18, 2010)

And the rest of the post:Here is Sim's response with my replies in bold type:



> *Sim:*   In a message dated 4/18/2010 6:03:31 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,   sim@sbebuilders.com writes:Dick,
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think at this point that this case is of  interest to inspectors nationwide to show what a really sharp inspector  can do, in this case inspecting the inspector! I have never had a  municipal inspector call the work of a special inspector, of course I've  never had a municipal inspector call a structural engineer, the  municipal inspectors are usually just happy to see structural engineers  and special inspectors take the workload and legal liabilities off their  backs. For those interested I've attached below the WPS from the plans.
View attachment 109


View attachment 109


/monthly_2010_04/wps.jpg.c940d716debe64804d8940692b95dd9e.jpg


----------



## Yankee (Apr 18, 2010)

Wow, , , what a pickle,

In any case, IMHO, the B.O. trumps the Special Inspector should the B.O. have knowledge or information that the S.E. is not preforming, certified or not. I think it just happens to be the case that most Building Officials don't have the detailed specialized knowledge that a Special Inspector (is supposed to) have. However, there are plenty of Building Officials with a high degree of knowledge in one specialized area, and they could certainly recognize an inspection fault in that area should they see one and it is incumbent upon them to "hold the presses" in that instance.


----------



## conarb (Apr 18, 2010)

Yankee:

Here's the problem as I see it, whenever I've had a special inspection signed off I've proceeded as if the inspector had signed it off, in this case Sim had his Special Inspection report and the SE's personal sign off on the steel, he proceeded to bolt his nailers and continue his framing.  After the building is framed the municipal inspector comes on site and condemns the special inspection, now parts of what had been framed up have to be torn down so the work already inspected can be fixed and re-inspected, prior to replacing the framing.   

If Special Inspections are going to be second guessed maybe we ought to do away with that whole section of the code and have the municipal inspector inspect everything, even if it means he's got to stand around and watch things like iron work, pier drilling, epoxy bolting, and CMU lift pouring, to mention a few. 

To me the bigger infraction here is allowing the Special Inspector to be employed by the contractor, in this situation this SE firm had inspected several of the framing contractor's recent prior homes, if the SE firm knows that the contractor is referring future work to him he may well allow some corners to be cut.


----------



## Yankee (Apr 18, 2010)

It is hard for me to follow the paperwork discussion i.e. who knew what and when, but to keep it simple, if the connection is not correct it will need to be fixed or accepted as an equal alternative to meeting the code. I have a slight suspicion that the BO did not simply stumble upon this error after asking that the brace be removed but was following some kind of thought process that would indicate that he was likely to find a flaw. There is the Building Board of Appeals process for the contractor or engineer, , , , or inspection agency, or all three if they feel their acceptable alternative is not being approved by the BO. Maybe a bit hard to win the appeal in this town which seems to be cheer-leading for their BO. Amazing.


----------

