Documenting a Failed Inspection Under Pressure
You inspect a final grade and drainage package on a Friday afternoon. The lot drains toward the foundation on the north side, with visible ponding in a low spot within 6 feet of the foundation wall. The approved plan shows a swale directing flow around the north side to a rear discharge point. The swale is partially constructed but blocked by a stockpile of topsoil. The builder says the landscaper will fix it Monday and asks you to sign off so the closing can proceed Friday evening. You have authority to approve, approve with conditions, or fail the inspection.
1. What is the appropriate inspection disposition, and what must your report contain?
Read the worked answer
Fail the inspection (or, if your jurisdiction allows, a documented conditional approval that withholds final sign-off). The as-built condition does not match the approved drainage plan: flow is directed toward the foundation and ponding is within 6 feet of the wall, and the swale is blocked.
Report must contain:
- Date, time, permit number, address, and inspector identity.
- What was observed, with measurements: ponding location and its distance to the foundation, the blocked swale, the stockpile location.
- The standard applied - the approved plan and the code provision on grading/drainage away from the foundation.
- The deficiency stated as a required correction: clear the stockpile, complete the swale, and re-grade so the north side drains to the rear discharge point.
- Re-inspection requirement and how to request it.
- Notification to all relevant parties in writing.
The builder's closing schedule does not change the finding. A verbal promise to fix it Monday is not a correction.
2. The builder argues the ponding is minor and will evaporate. How do you respond, and what would justify a different disposition?
Read the worked answer
Respond on the record: the issue is not the volume of water but the gradient and path. Water ponding within 6 feet of the foundation and a swale that directs flow toward the wall instead of around it is a drainage defect that the approved plan was designed to prevent. Evaporation does not address the next storm.
A different disposition would be justified only if:
- The swale were completed and the stockpile removed, and
- Re-grading demonstrated positive fall away from the foundation to the discharge point, and
- A re-inspection verified it.
If your code permits conditional approval, it must be in writing, tied to specific corrections and a deadline, with final sign-off withheld until verified. Otherwise the disposition stands as a fail. Either way, the file should show the observed condition, the standard, the required correction, and the verification step - so the decision is reviewable regardless of the schedule pressure.