I live in Allen and the 60 million dollar stadium we got fucked with does not meet code. Should that have not been caught by the city inspectors? I am asking not accusing. Thanks

How do you know?   What is not code?

Shouldn't the people who built it know code? I thought the Inspectors come in after the fact?

Yes and No....yes he/she should know whatever code your jurisdiction is under. However the process isn't as clear cut as your question. Like, was it even inspected at all? Who engineered the plan? Was it even built to plan with the specified material? Where was the construction superintendent during this? Were things revised or altered after passing inspection? Did the engineer of record visit, inspect or sign off on any change orders? Was the inspector ( leaned on ) by city officials? The list can go on and on. I think the question of due diligence rests on all of the above.
   I am not trying to avoid your question with a question just trying to help you understand that the process isn't  what you think it is and the responsibility in a project that large doesn't rest on one person. I have no knowledge of this stadium but I would start with who has the most to gain from it.

Thanks for your reply.

The forensic engineer report states that the spacing for the concrete reinforcement was too wide according to code. I will try to find the report again.

Job like that has engineered design specs.
Should also be engineers doing the inspections.
Engineers from company that did engineered drawings and / or a 3rd party independent.
City inspectors not up to that task as they are not engineers.
City engineer maybe should have been more involved.
Cost of Engineering is really not expensive for what its worth.
A 60 million dollar job should have had all kinds of engineered eyes on it.

This is just my opinion as I am more familiar with residential construction than commercial but do work with structural engineers for foundations and some framing.

That poses the question of:
Who did the prepour inspection for that and signed off on pouring it?
And did they sign off on it because it met the engineered design specs?

I agree, that is the bottom line.

You've already got some very informative "long answers" here.

The short answer is yes. The plans should have gone through a city "plan check" and approved prior to beginning construction. The "city inspector" should have been able to confirm the building was being constructed in compliance with local codes, plans, & specs.

From the articles I have read since the release of the report, the faults were primarily with the original design. Sounds like the ball may have been dropped pretty early on, and no one knew or did anything.

It's the engineer of record that stamped/signed the drawings ultimate responsibility. Also the design firm that hired said engineer.

Inspectors are generalist; should it have been caught, possibly. There is a lot of information delivered in a set of plans for something that size, you can't expect code inspection for a city to catch it all. Not reasonable in my book.

I consult to architects and my wife designs for hotels. My opinion FWIW.

http://thescoopblog.dallasnews.com/2014/06/allen-isd-to-release-info-on-engineering-study-about-stadium-cracks.html/




 
 

On a project of that size code enforcement should catch major problem in the plan check stage but they may just assume that the engineers know what they are doing and go with the plan and then inspect by the plan.

Code enforcement inspectors vary from complete bumbling  dumb fucks to fairly qualified.  

Lets face facts if a man is a master electrician, plumber, hvac/ mech and carpenter why would he work for what most city inspectors make.

Also the engineers and the inspectors that the architects use rarely give a shit to hold the contractors feet to the fire.

Our local school district get the fucks put to them time and time again and I have tried to help them but they get mad when someone points out problems preferring to let the tax payer pay for these mistakes down the road.

You sir, are correct.

1. If and that's a big if. The municipality even has a plan review  process it probably consists of a engineering intern chewing gum and listening to the iPod while day dreaming or pretending  they can read plans much less red line them. Very rarely will they contest a PE. That seal goes along way and ultimately is responsible if the scope of work was built to submitted and accepted plan.

2. Your inspector in my opinion should always come from a trade. Doesn't really matter which one.but something that will give them common sense and empathy.It is a form of apprenticeship that you will see less and less of. It is the only way he / she will have street credit so to speak with the contractors and subs. You would be shocked at how often people get that job because of a underlying agenda.

3. The pay sucks and people do it for the benefits and retirement. When they are old, injured or can no longer compete with a work force that doesn't pay taxes, insurance and will work on Christmas Day.

4. Engineers  and architects are not always onsite to hold the contractor responsible and often times a inspector will be directed to be a little more "accommodating and understanding" to certain projects of  public or political interests. I'm sure it's how a officer feels when he pulls over a DWI suspect  just to realize it's a congressman or some other self important person that will make things difficult on him even if he doesn't outwardly  get fired.
    You have to realize as TRB correctly pointed out. Most engineering companies have in house reps that inspect projects for them ,document take pics etc and then present it to the engineer for review. Rarely does the engineer visit the site unless things are in need of special attention.

5. Your school officials are probably embarrassed over the whole thing and just want it to go away. All they were really concerned about was how good it would make them look to have it opened and running for the new school year.  You haven't seen finger pointing until these people start having to explain all this to the school board and tax payers. But in all seriousness insurance will probably foot most of it.

They're bureaucrats...



 

I'm sure the city inspectors are more adept at inspecting McMansions than giant concrete complexes.  They probably had to contract it out to some degree.

Depends on how much money was in the envelopes the inspectors were given.

I can tell you, from the fire side, that the stadium pretty much had one inspector working on it full time.