# Ridiculous requests from inspector



## Dan_Watson (Mar 1, 2008)

I really understand why home owners and lets be honest, a lot of contractors do not get permits.

The job- 8'x8' deck, less than 24" off the ground. It is being built over an existing concrete patio. Sliding door into the house, one set of steps down to an existing concrete pad.

Apply for the permits, provide a framing plan, footing detail, side elevation, and rail and step details. All hardware was called out and specified, including lengths of fasteners, spacing, details of bolt patterns for the ledger and the one beam. Plot plan, even though the patio is original...1968.

Included in the packet were the manufactures specs and installation instructions just in case. 

Received a letter today from the building department "Explain how footings are being installed. Provide sample of all fasteners and screws."

Went to the office the 'Technical Assistant', who wrote the letter, can not tell me what is needed because it was passed on from the inspector, who only works Monday mornings from 8-12. So a couple day job is going to be at least 4 weeks since I have to wait a week between inspections and can not get answers to my questions.


Am I expected to write that I am cutting an opening in the existing patio, using a shovel to excavate the dirt. Placing the dirt to the side for back fill. Placing the sono tube...etc???

:furious:


----------



## Bob Kovacs (May 4, 2005)

Alwaysconfusd11 said:


> Am I expected to write that I am cutting an opening in the existing patio, using a shovel to excavate the dirt. Placing the dirt to the side for back fill. Placing the sono tube...etc???
> 
> :furious:


Yup- sounds like exactly what he wants you to do. 

Regarding the part-time inspector, that's the case in many small towns, especially since the economy took a dump. I'd suggest checking such things before pricing a job. We used to do a ton of work in one town that had an inspector who only worked two mornings a week, and had a reputation for being a real bastard, too. We knew about the schedule up front, so we were able to work with it, and after he saw the quality of work we were doing, he turned out to be a great guy. It got to the point that if we got I a bind and needed to pour footings on a day that he wasn't around, he'd just let us take pictures of the holes- that's the kind of trust you can build up if you try hard.


----------



## ScipioAfricanus (Sep 13, 2008)

Post your plans, let's take a look.

Andy.


----------



## Dan_Watson (Mar 1, 2008)

Here is the main print. The rest were separate sheets.


----------



## TimNJ (Sep 7, 2005)

Bob Kovacs said:


> Yup- sounds like exactly what he wants you to do.
> 
> Regarding the part-time inspector, that's the case in many small towns, especially since the economy took a dump. I'd suggest checking such things before pricing a job. We used to do a ton of work in one town that had an inspector who only worked two mornings a week, and had a reputation for being a real bastard, too. We knew about the schedule up front, so we were able to work with it, and after he saw the quality of work we were doing, he turned out to be a great guy. It got to the point that if we got I a bind and needed to pour footings on a day that he wasn't around, he'd just let us take pictures of the holes- that's the kind of trust you can build up if you try hard.



Bob, you used to live in NJ right? Did you ever work in Lambertville/Hopewell in the 80's?:laughing: Sounds like the guy to a "T". Same situation, once he got used to seeing our work, he really was great guy. But the first jobs he was "testing" to see what you knew.


----------



## Bob Kovacs (May 4, 2005)

TimNJ said:


> Bob, you used to live in NJ right? Did you ever work in Lambertville/Hopewell in the 80's?:laughing: Sounds like the guy to a "T". Same situation, once he got used to seeing our work, he really was great guy. But the first jobs he was "testing" to see what you knew.


That was actually in Fanwood. He worked part time there and part time someplace else- Berkeley Heights I think. Had a similar scenario in Florham Park- building official was only in from 4m-7pm a few nights a week- had to go during those times if you had any questions or concerns. Great guy, who worked with you whenever he could.


----------



## ScipioAfricanus (Sep 13, 2008)

I don't think they are looking for an explanation in of the work in text form but my guess is that they want you to show a cut-away of the existing slab detailing the sono-tube and conc. and any steel there-in. 
I think your plans are fine the way they are and really show what is going to go on but your building Department apparently doesn't agree with me (the bastards).
maybe graphically show the hangers and detail the 'Z' bar, deck to wall flashing more.

Andy.


----------



## Dan_Watson (Mar 1, 2008)

ScipioAfricanus said:


> I don't think they are looking for an explanation in of the work in text form but my guess is that they want you to show a cut-away of the existing slab detailing the sono-tube and conc. and any steel there-in.
> I think your plans are fine the way they are and really show what is going to go on but your building Department apparently doesn't agree with me (the bastards).
> maybe graphically show the hangers and detail the 'Z' bar, deck to wall flashing more.
> 
> Andy.


No metal being put in. I am cutting a 13" square, removing that concrete, digging, putting in a tube, so round footing, then the top will be square so its a clean tie in to the existing slab. I guess it is unclear that the square top is being cut in to the existing. I can see that now.


----------



## Jimmy Cabinet (Jan 22, 2010)

Bob Kovacs said:


> That was actually in Fanwood. He worked part time there and part time someplace else- Berkeley Heights I think. Had a similar scenario in Florham Park- building official was only in from 4m-7pm a few nights a week- had to go during those times if you had any questions or concerns. Great guy, who worked with you whenever he could.


Hi Bob:
Long time no hear. Correct me here if you experienced otherwise but I can not ever remember having troubles with Inspectors in our home town. I can't think of one though I'm really stretching my memory here. My troubles were in Hopatcong, Stanhope, Parsippiny, Budd Lake, Netcong, Hackettstown. New Brunswick was no cake walk either as well as Red Bank. Geez if I keep thinking I'm coming up with idiot Inspectors who made everyone's live miserable. Because we had trouble with these clowns does not reflect us or anyone doing inferior work. Inspectors just think they are pigs without badges and a weapon but they all have the big fat know it all head.

Big fat Paul in Hopatcong. I'll never forget him. "You better be doing things right up there boy cause fat boys like me don't climb ladders". He had to pull and lift his belly up to take a pee I'm sure of. Always had one hand out in the open position and a green sticker in the other hand. Would never say the words but the intent was crystal clear. Had to deal with that azzhole for many years as we had many of the community development block grant jobs.


----------



## jdw4748 (Mar 2, 2011)

Did a project at a state assisted living complex. Woman had driven through the 6x6 posts and snapped of the tops of the 8" concrete piers holding up a second story deck. Local buiding inspector demanded stamped drawings for our permit. New drawings called for new 8" piers 4' down with an equivilent to "bigfoots". Well we start trying to remove the original piers and discover that they went done 8' with a 2'x2' footing and 5 pieces of #4 rebar. On top of that little issue the area was a sinkhole. Couldn't dig down 3' without the hole filling with water and the sides collapsing. So we get the architect out there and get approval to leave the existing piers but we would encapsulate with a 20" tube (needed a 20'' tube to get the new deck post onto the center of the piers). So being the good contractor we bring the revised detail to the inspector. Also let him know that due to the water issue we were going to have us a mud sucker pump to get the new tubes into the ground and that there would not be anyway to get a inspection prior to pouring concrete. So we tell him what day we were going to be setting/pouring the new tubes. So about 3/4 of the way through the day he shows up. Now because of the amount of time it took to get a tube into the ground we poured the tubes with mix onsite bagged concrete instead of using trucked concrete. Building inspector starts giving us a line of bullsh*t about how bagged concrete is not sufficient and that its only good for simple pours. Now we were using either 4000 or 5000 pound concrete (not from Home Depot). Now this led to a very heated "discussion" about the merits of redi-mix concrete. All the while we are still trying to finish before we have anymore collapsing. Anyway it was left that as long as the architect signed of on the piers the building inspector would let it go. Now this new deck was only 12 feet deep by 16 feet long with 3 piers 20" round by 4 feet deep. Most of the architects that design for public works have code compliance designers/inspectors. So when we called the architect for an inspection we also got a sign off on the bagged concrete. Can you imagine what will happen to the next car that hits one of those piers.


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

So, basically, you're just by-passing the original slab. That's probably smarter than trying to get them to go along with connecting the piers to the existing slab.

I personally wouldn't do the square of concrete at the slab level. I would just run the sonotube up above grade (maybe a foot? or whatever clearance you have) and build like there never was even a slab there. Set your beam directly on the poured pier... with metal plates or standoff brackets of course.


----------



## katoman (Apr 26, 2009)

Here the sono tube has to either be 'belled' at the bottom, or sit on a footing. Check your code. This may be what he's referring to.


----------



## tedanderson (May 19, 2010)

Alwaysconfusd11 said:


> I really understand why home owners and lets be honest, a lot of contractors do not get permits. The job- 8'x8' deck, less than 24" off the ground.


Weekend warriors get away with building a tree houses bigger than that! 

I think that even though they know that this type of job poses no real safety risk, the burocracy is what makes them give you a hard time about it.. simply because they saw it.

This reminds me of when I took my truck in for the registration inspection- I had a set of aftermarket fog lights on the truck that didn't work. They failed me even though all of the factory installed lights worked. The inspector said, "You should have taken them off. If I see that the lights are not operational, that counts against you."

And I am sure that the same principle/mindset applies here. If you build an 8x8 deck and you don't say anything about it, nobody will know or care. But because you brought it to their attention, they want to run you through the red tape.


----------



## Dan_Watson (Mar 1, 2008)

katoman said:


> Here the sono tube has to either be 'belled' at the bottom, or sit on a footing. Check your code. This may be what he's referring to.


No I'm fine there not required. I am fairly certain its because of the existing slab and how I am not attaching to it. I can now see how it could be hard to follow since he knows nothing but the drawing I gave him. Samples of all hardware, bolts, and screws still erks me with the amount of info I gave in the packet.

It happens. The worst part is the part time inspector bs that really drags this **** out. I am a runner and an instant gratification type of person. If her was there to day it would be done with and I would be over it.


----------



## JT Wood (Dec 17, 2007)

katoman said:


> Here the sono tube has to either be 'belled' at the bottom, or sit on a footing. Check your code. This may be what he's referring to.



Silly question, How do you put a bell at the bottom of the hole?


----------



## greg24k (May 19, 2007)

Do you have stair plan and attachment to deck detail for the stairs and footing? There is no beam hanger size specification or what fasteners will be used other then,i.e. 10p teco nails, etc. It seems they want to see every little detail, especially this deck is being build down the shore, the worry about the hurricanes and they want to make sure that fasteners are not only ACQ compliant, but they also been tested to 1000 hours of salt spray protection I guess to prevent corrosion.


----------



## Dan_Watson (Mar 1, 2008)

Yea there were stair and railing spec sheets. My typ. sheets attached. No where near the shore, about an hour to the closest salt water.


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

hughjazz said:


> Silly question, How do you put a bell at the bottom of the hole?


I guess like this. But I didn't know sonotube made anything like this.


----------



## Dan_Watson (Mar 1, 2008)

When digging the footing you start to undermine the earth at a greater diameter than the tub and then the concrete spills out into that area. In order for the footing to heave it needs to move all of the earth that is still on top of the bell. 

hey also make footing feet for it. 

http://www.bigfootsystems.com/


----------



## katoman (Apr 26, 2009)

hughjazz said:


> Silly question, How do you put a bell at the bottom of the hole?


What we do here, which is accepted by the inspectors is you first dig or auger to your four foot depth. Then with a small shovel, flat bar, or whatever, you widen the bottom foot or so of the hole.

This creates in effect a footing, or larger base for the sono tube. We only install the tube to the three foot depth. Or you can drop the sono tube into the hole, begin your pour, then pull the tube up to allow the concrete to fill the larger area.

In Ontario it's either that or excavate, pour a footing, then pour your sono tubes. Here the inspectors check for this and will not allow a straight sono tube install.

Like in Willie's drawing.


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

Well, here it is: http://www.bigfootsystems.com/include/docs/cad_BF-36-3d.pdf

http://www.bigfootsystems.com/

Seems the sonotube 'snaps' onto , or is screwed into the appropriate sized ring at the top, and you just pour all of it at once.

Cool!

They also have it (or something similar) double as a funnel for pouring.


----------



## JT Wood (Dec 17, 2007)

They last few I've had anything to do with were 6' deep.

I was wondering how you would excavate a "bell"


But I guess at 4' you could reach down with a bar or what ever:thumbsup:


I quoted an addition recently that was spec'd for either a bell at 4' (10")
or a 12" straight sonotube @6'


I was speaking to the excavator recently, and he recommended only putting the sonotube 1' down into the hole then letting the concrete fill the rest. Apparently this creates better friction and helps resist settling, not sure about heaving.

I'd never heard this before.
Do you guys agree with him?


----------



## greg24k (May 19, 2007)

What a pain in the a$$ doing that with a backhoe, I don't know why they don't get a pump for that job, would be in and out process.


----------



## Willie T (Jan 29, 2009)

Looks like a power line right of way. Maybe they had access problems, and only a tractor could get in there?


----------



## greg24k (May 19, 2007)

Trailer concrete pump or a line pump is another name for them, which uses a hoses instead of a boom. Used for a low volume pour i.e footings, swimming pools,basements,etc it would work perfect for that job.


----------



## Dan_Watson (Mar 1, 2008)

That picture looks old. Maybe it was available, or a lot less common.


----------



## Dan_Watson (Mar 1, 2008)

Thoughts on adding this to supplement the packet.


----------



## Bob Kovacs (May 4, 2005)

Jimmy Cabinet said:


> Correct me here if you experienced otherwise but I can not ever remember having troubles with Inspectors in our home town. I can't think of one though I'm really stretching my memory here.


No, never had any problems in Woodbridge- the only place I ever had problems, really was in Bridgewater- they were brutal. But again, once you got to know them, it got easier- not as easy as some places, but at least to the point that you didn't dread calling for an inspection.



Jimmy Cabinet said:


> Big fat Paul in Hopatcong. I'll never forget him. "You better be doing things right up there boy cause fat boys like me don't climb ladders".


I had a "Big Fat Paul"-type electrical inspector in another town where I was building a 6-story office building. We didn't have a hoist on the job, so until the elevators were up and running, everyone had to use the stairs. I called for an electrical inspection on the penthouse so we could get the elevators powered up, and as I was coming back from lunch, the electrical inspector was walking out of the building with the electrical foreman. I asked how it went, and the inspector handed me a green sticker, while saying "next time you call for a penthouse inspection, let the girls know that the penthouse is on the roof, and I'll have them send the skinny guy- I'm not climbing thouse stairs and giving myself a heart attack!"

OK.....so when I specifically said it was a "penthouse inspection", and the girls even wrote that on your inspection schedule, you didn't realize it was on the roof??? Were you expecting us to bring the penthouse down to you, or were you thinking you were coming to inspect naked women for Penthouse????


----------



## CookeCarpentry (Feb 26, 2009)

Alwaysconfusd11 said:


> Thoughts on adding this to supplement the packet.


More info the better.

The idea of having to submit drawings for a basic footer is a little absurd, but if that's what they want, do it.

I always submit probably more info than is necessary when I file permits hoping that either a. the building inspector knows his stuff, and will see I know what I am doing or b. the building inspector is an idiot, gets drowned in paperwork, and assumes because I submitted a lot of info I must know what I am doing. :shifty:


----------



## Dan_Watson (Mar 1, 2008)

CookeCarpentry said:


> More info the better.
> 
> The idea of having to submit drawings for a basic footer is a little absurd, but if that's what they want, do it.
> 
> I always submit probably more info than is necessary when I file permits hoping that either a. the building inspector knows his stuff, and will see I know what I am doing or b. the building inspector is an idiot, gets drowned in paperwork, and assumes because I submitted a lot of info I must know what I am doing. :shifty:


I am the same way. I thought I added enough info, gave 20 sheets of manufacture specs and multiple details.


----------



## MALCO.New.York (Feb 27, 2008)

"Ridiculous" denotes a situation that can be laughed off...

Unfortunately, NOTHING that an Inspector JUDGING your work says is "ridiculous". You MUST do what need be done. Whether it be jumping through hoops or negotiating.


----------



## Dan_Watson (Mar 1, 2008)

Or buck the system and keep them in line. 

I was using ridiculous as in absurd. But with this ****, you need to just laugh it off or it will drive you crazy.


----------



## RenaissanceR (May 16, 2006)

*Read the Manual..*

[deleted]


----------



## Dan_Watson (Mar 1, 2008)

Finally met with the inspector. I do not want to be to negative, but its obvious he is incapable of performing his job anymore. Is there a way of reporting the situation to the sate?

He is easily in his 70's, obvious signs of a stroke, broken dominate hand, 2 hearing aids that do not work. Unaware of any new technologies. I am unsure as to how he will be doing any site inspections.

He never looked at anything I gave him. He was asking questions about what decking even with the manufacturers instructions in his hand. 

The real kicker, and I apologize since this is going to be hard to explain on here. He is requiring me to pour the new deck footing right up against the slab. I do not need to tie the two together but I am not allowed to use an expansion joint. We argued for 20 minuets about this. He stated that the slab, about 15'x20' will not heave because of the new footings and that the use of the expansion joint facilitates the heaving of the slab. He thinks the 2 10" footings will stop 300' of concrete on grade from moving. WHAT THE ****?!?!

Am I wrong or should I not be worried about this deck moving? What would you do?


----------



## CookeCarpentry (Feb 26, 2009)

If you feel that validated in your approach, will the town let you use a 3rd party independent consultant/inspection agency? And let their ruling/judgement be final.


----------



## WarnerConstInc. (Jan 30, 2008)

Is there a big enough hole for this inspector?


----------



## Dan_Watson (Mar 1, 2008)

Monetarily impracticle.


----------



## Dan_Watson (Mar 1, 2008)

WarnerConstInc. said:


> Is there a big enough hole for this inspector?


The actual pier? Yes.


----------



## JustaFramer (Jan 21, 2005)

Just put some bond breaker around your cut joints on the slab.


----------



## greg24k (May 19, 2007)

Alwaysconfusd11 said:


> Finally met with the inspector. I do not want to be to negative, but its obvious he is incapable of performing his job anymore. Is there a way of reporting the situation to the sate?
> 
> He is easily in his 70's, obvious signs of a stroke, broken dominate hand, 2 hearing aids that do not work. Unaware of any new technologies. I am unsure as to how he will be doing any site inspections.
> 
> ...


You can file a complain with the DCA, asking them to get involved and arrange for a meeting...and a they will send someone out, and check everything out. They nice guys and they do not take sides. In most cases you will not see that inspector inspecting your work again. It will take time, but if you think you 100% right and what he is doing is uncalled for, then go for it, just make sure you did everything you need to do by the book, and everything meets the code and local jurisdiction. 
Before you make a call, go back to the township inspector, and ask him to put everything he found wrong on the plan in writing, and to specify the code # next to each violation... If he is right, then fix it, if he is wrong, make a call. He is a public official and by law he must show everything in writing.

I know a few guys did that and they never had a problem again doing work in that town...in one case inspector was replaced, because this wasn't first complaint against him. Everything that inspector asked this builder to do, was uncalled for, and there was nothing in the code that said it was done wrong or required...he bend it a few times and did it, but enough is enough and he took a stand and won.

Good luck


----------

