pools1 wrote:I was thinking about how the plans were approved and then the steps built exactly as shown in the permitted plans. Each step has a rectangular box showing the dimension 10" X 24 inside each of the 3 drawn steps.
If "the steps built exactly as shown in the permitted plans" and "Each step has a rectangular box showing the dimension 10" X 24 inside each of the 3 drawn steps", then the 10" x 24" rectangular plywood the inspector is going to place there would fit inside each of the 3 steps ... right? ... if "the steps built exactly as shown".
I was under the impression the rectangular boxes were to illustrate the required 240 unobstructed inches for which each step has.
The rectangles do indicate the required 240 unobstructed square inches as the 10" x 24" rectangular boxes you describe as being shown within the step is the required 240 square inches ... unless my math is incorrect.
The steps were built according to the approved plans.
They were?
You said the approved plans show "rectangular box showing the dimension 10" X 24 inside each" step, but that is not the case as you originally described the steps.
- You originally described the steps this way: "The inspector however is going to place a 24" X 10" rectangular template over the first step to try and illustrate the 240 square inch minimum code required surface area is missing when in fact it is not. In doing so, the 2 top corners of said template will protrude over the rounded radius by 1 1/2 on each side and I will fail the inspection." If that is the case, then by your own statements the steps are not "built according to the approved plans".
Isn't that in itself a valid argument? The building department approved the shown steps and dimensions.
That is not the case here as you said the approved drawings show that "Each step has a rectangular box showing the dimension 10" X 24 inside each of the 3 drawn steps".
However, to answer your question of: If the approved documents (plans, etc) are approved during plan review, no, the actual construction must still meet code.
First, rarely are plans stamped "Approved", usually the plans are stamped "Reviewed for code compliance" (stamping "Approved" went out quite some time ago due in part to the argument you are trying to make - the code now mandates that the approved documents are stamped with "Reviewed for code compliance").
However, as a contractor, when you are given back a set of documents which are stamped "Reviewed for code compliance" you naturally take that as meaning the documents are "approved" if there are no notations or correction notations made, and that is a reasonable presumption, albeit an incorrect presumption.
The work itself is required to meet the code, whether or not a non-compliant condition was or was not found during plan review and whether or not a non-compliant condition was or was not found during an inspection. If an inspection is approved but a non-compliant condition is found during a subsequent inspection - the non-compliant condition needs to be corrected.
This is because the licensed contractor is responsible for the work meeting at least the minimum requirements of the building codes, whether or not the work is inspected ... the licensed contractor is the responsible party and that responsibility cannot be shifted to the building department, the plans examiner or the inspector.
From the 2010 FBC- Residential (bold is mine)
- R101.2.1
- - The provisions of Chapter 1, Florida Building Code,
Building, shall govern the administration and enforcement of the Florida Building Code, Residential.
From the 2010 FBC-Building (underlining and bold are mine)
- SECTION 110 INSPECTIONS
- - 110.1 General.
- - - Construction or work for which a permit is required shall be subject to inspection by the building official and such construction or work shall remain accessible and exposed for inspection purposes until approved. Approval as a result of an inspection shall not be construed to be an approval of a violation of the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction.
Inspections presuming to give authority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid. It shall be the duty of the permit applicant to cause the work to remain accessible and exposed for inspection purposes. Neither the building official nor the jurisdiction shall be liable for expense entailed in the removal or replacement of any material required to allow inspection.