In the days of my youth, my father and uncles were the largest (and best) framing contractors in the Spokane, Washington area. There was a time when (at least to the builders concerned) a particular field inspector was coming off as being arbitrary in his enforcement of the Building Code.

The situation got to be so out of hand, extreme measures were taken to resolve the issue. It seems the inspector left his house one morning to drive to work, and found all of the windows had been shot out of his vehicle. Apparently the inspector understood the message, and relocated not long afterwards.

By and large, the great majority of Building Inspectors and Officials are wonderful people, who are only trying to do their job – which is to ensure structures are built properly to protect the safety of the occupants, as well as neighbors and innocent bystanders.

I recently read this article, which voiced some complaints about a particular inspector: in Michigan: https://www.thedailyreporter.com/article/20160111/NEWS/160119930/

Here is my take on portions of the article:

Cries of “rudeness and disrespect” just do not cut it – they are arbitrary terms which do not contain specifics.

“Bill Avra said Buller was not approving what had been approved for the past 30 years.”

It could be very possible what had been approved for the past 30 years was wrong! The Building Codes are changed every three years, sometimes the changes are minor, other times they are significant. Just because it has always been approved in the past, does not make it correct under the current version of the Code. I see this every day, in my job, with old time officials who are rooted in older versions of the Code and approve things which just do not work under current rules.

“Gerald Marsh said he has put up pole barns for 20 years. Buller is requiring more footing than in the past.

Marsh said he asked to see the code “book” on the requirements and was show a computer screen.

Like the city of Coldwater, the county and many communities now have gone to computerized code books because it is easier with frequent updates and to store the thousands of pages of building codes now used in the U.S. and state of Michigan.

In order to get a final occupancy permit, Tyler Longstreet said Buller wanted him to rip out the already-approved foundation of a barn storage building behind the new Longstreet Furniture store.

“He had multiple issues with what had been previously approved,” Longstreet said.

Planet PowerSports owner Shawn Avra said Buller refused to permit butt joints on trusses and wanted lap joints for a similar building behind his store. Since the plans had been signed and approved by a registered engineer, “There is no reason why the plans should not have been approved,” Avra said.”

In the case of requiring more footing than in the past for a pole barn, I would venture to guess the inspector is correct. The builder can easily hire an engineer to confirm what he has been doing is correct (my money says it was inadequate, as are most pole barn footings).

The Building Code is every bit as valid electronically, as it is on paper. The IBC (International Building Code) sites references to a myriad of other published books and reports. An inspector would need to pull a trailer around with him in order to bring printed copies of even a portion of the “books”. The builder needs to get himself current with technology and accept electronic versions are a reality.

As to an inspector making changes to engineered plans, here is my take: https://www.hansenpolebuildings.com/tag/engineered-plans/