If I have steel moment frame, shear wall that requires closer nailing and special hold downs, or anything that is out of the ordinary, I do. But it does not need to be a third party, you can do it yourself. On my contract I add the extra cost to do a site visit for anything and also hourly extra work. They can find a third party inspector or ask us to do it. The EOR or an engineer that is qualified from the same office can perform this. That is my understanding anyway.

Wow, expecting special inspections on single family residential certainly seems like wishful thinking to me. I would think if you can get clients and contractors to go along with this, you must be in a very select, high-end market.

My understanding is if done completely by the IRC then SSI is not required, unless required by the ICC reports for products used, like post installed epoxy anchors. All the houses we design do not fall within the IRC and therefore end up being designed per the IBC and we therefore require SSI per the IBC. If you have a mix of IRC and IBC, I would argue only the engineered items required SSI. Also make sure to check local and state amendments, especially as it appears you are in California.

As far as the technical requirements of when Special Inspections are required per code, I think Aesur's delineation, based on IRC vs IBC and which elements of the building are designed to which code, is correct.

Quote (Aesur)

like post installed epoxy anchors

.

I think some of the newer ESRs for mechanical anchors are starting to show up with special inspection requirements as well, i.e. Hilti KB-III, last I looked.

Special inspector is a different thing than structural engineer of record, fundamentally, and I'm not a huge fan of the ethical loophole of inspecting your own design, anyway.

It isn't that well understood that the owner is supposed to hire the special inspector, not the contractor, and the reasoning there is to avoid a conflict of interest, as I recall.

The special inspection and testing form (it's a state requirement for me, typically) will indicate these things, or something similar should be produced. As I recall, locally, it was CASE that came up with the idea for a form and promulgated it "upwards" to the state.

Bear in mind, also, that a fair number of states either DELETE (cough Wisconsin cough) or completely overwrite (cough Florida cough) the SI&TS provisions. As engineer of record, I would argue it is within your authority to instate them, and it is probably arguable as a standard of care to add them when the state, in their infinite wisdom, deletes them.

Thanks for the comments.

So for those that require SSI on their drawings, what do you do when the contractor ignores it? Around my area, the AHJ will inspect and barely even look at the plans. Let alone enforce a note buried in the general notes sheet.

Quote (lexpatrie)

I think some of the newer ESRs for mechanical anchors are starting to show up with special inspection requirements as well, i.e. Hilti KB-III, last I looked.

I'll be sure NOT to specify that anchor.

If a contractor ignores special inspections I would bring it up to the architect first and then the client. If the local building dept needs a final sign off from the PE you can use this as leverage. Typically if the structure is complicated to require special inspections the contractor is used to high end building and stricter requirements. I love the back of the truck guys but they are not always the best for modern homes with steel moment frames, welding, and other atypical framing situations.

The structure doesn't need to be complicated, any epoxy use is probably going to have special inspections attached to the ESR. It's starting to show up in the mechanical anchors, too.

Quote (XR250)

I'll be sure NOT to specify that anchor.

I thought almost all post installed anchor ICC's have required SSI for the past 10+ years...

Quote (GaStruct)

So for those that require SSI on their drawings, what do you do when the contractor ignores it?

If I know about it, I will mention it to my client, the architect typically, and see where it goes from there. Many houses seem to be finished before I even knew they were under construction it seems. If the BO requires a letter (rarely for residential) stating they are ok, then a pull test may be required to confirm acceptance. For these typically, we request something like 15% to 25% randomly selected by us are tested, if any fail then test all, repairing as required. If they don't do this, I document my objection to them not following the contract documents and will not provide anything to assist the COO. I would give some leeway occasionally however if I look at the actual loads and determine the anchor was greatly over designed as can occur when using min size anchors for other reasons, etc.

Almost all ahj in the california bay area require a special inspections list completed and submitted before the building permit is approved. Our plans also have the required special inspections listed on the cover sheet.

I find that AHJ's that are "cities" are more sophisticated with a more extensive plan review and submittal process. What I call "local" towns that have an inspector/plan reviewer part time will not make comments on special inspections. Sometimes the small town projects are reviewed by the county but even then I have not filled out DOB forms for special inspections.