• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Common design and drawing mistakes

BayPointArchitect

BayPointArchitect

Sawhorse
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
515
Location
Lincoln
I have been asked to put together a lunch-n-learn presentation. A group of commercial designers already have a basic understanding of codes. But they want to know what the common mistakes are and how to avoid them. They want to produce quality drawings that make the job of the plan reviewer easier. They want to make the list of code review comments a little shorter.

What are some of the most common mistakes that you find while reviewing construction drawings?

As always, thanks again for your help.

ICC Certified Plan Reviewer
NFPA Certified Fire Plan Examiner
Architect - but not licensed in your State
 
It has been a long time since I did any plan checking. While not a common problem, plans with too much ink on one page. There's so much information on a single drawing that it is difficult to make sense of it all. That was before the advent of computer generated plans so it might be moot.

Another item that I would flag is detail drawings that do not apply to the project and or details that do apply but are not called out anywhere on the plans. Because I see that on plans as an inspector I assume that it is not called out during plan check however, I always called it out when plan checking.

Items that are missed:
A note related to clay sewer pipe when there is an addition to the front of a building and/or the back of a building that has an alley. The note should clearly state that the addition can not be over a clay sewer pipe. Granted that's not a common correction during plan check only because nobody thinks about it and I have never seen the note on plans that I did not plan check....it is common as a correction during inspection. I show up for a foundation inspection and the first question I have is, "Where is the building sewer?" If it is determined to be clay pipe under the form-work it becomes an expensive setback. The contractor always says, "That should have been on the plans." It has happened dozens of times and I am just one inspector. I tried to get that onto the County plan review checklist but that did not happen.

If radiant barrier is a requirement, that should be stated on the roof plan and not only in the energy notes. There should also be a detail drawing of the various methods of providing a radiant barrier.
 
Last edited:
I can't believe that some engineers are actually wanting to get some hint for making drawings matter! I'm presently doing part-time work for a rebar company in the drawing we are getting to work from are totally ridiculous! It seems like engineers can only cut and paste information to put together a new set of drawings, they put no thought creating drawings for new projects. If they don't have a detail for something they just paste in something that's close and let others figure out what they really want!

The younger engineers in days (if you can even call them engineers) have no idea what it takes to be an engineer and more than that don't really care about doing quality work!
 
For me, like ICE, it has been quite a while since I did plan review. But back in the day, I found that PE's were as guilty as anyone else with cutting and pasting on "stock" residential plans, particularly beams and joist spans. It was easy to spot when they were over spanned.
 
Msradell said:
I can't believe that some engineers are actually wanting to get some hint for making drawings matter! I'm presently doing part-time work for a rebar company in the drawing we are getting to work from are totally ridiculous! It seems like engineers can only cut and paste information to put together a new set of drawings, they put no thought creating drawings for new projects. If they don't have a detail for something they just paste in something that's close and let others figure out what they really want!

The younger engineers in days (if you can even call them engineers) have no idea what it takes to be an engineer and more than that don't really care about doing quality work!
Click to expand...
As a design consultant for 40 years, I agree. I blame CAD at least in part. With pen and ink or even pencil, you had to think before drawing, because later changes were so tedious. Not so with CAD. Coupled with expected expected time savings and the pressure to produce, drawings just got worse. And then the really experienced architects and engineers were often not proficient at CAD, so drawings were produced by the inexperienced. And the number of drawings increased exponentially, which diluted review.

I'm glad I retired.
 
80 to 90% of my comments are born on the code summary/analysis (sometimes some of it is on an egress plan/life-safety, but often not). Most notably: missing mixed use strategy and previous/current/adjacent occupancy classifications. Also, CPET/EATD, required separation of exits. And like others, old and outdated boiler plates.
 
What I see:
Calling out the Wrong Codes.
Disregarding the State Amendments to the codes.
Using Old Regulations/Codes.
Failure to show compliance with the code.
Providing details that do not pertain. (standard sheets)
Providing Notes that do not pertain (standard sheets)
Not Providing details that do pertain.
Not Providing Notes that do pertain.
Overuse of calling out "similar" on detail callouts.
Structural or Energy Calcs not reflected on plans. ( wrong beam sizes. Beam #'s not called out on plans. Wrong insulation values. Wrong SHGC&U-factors)
 
The advice I shared with the Design Professionals or the contractors who might provide a sketch is
The info you need to BID IT or BUILD IT is what I need to REVIEW IT.

For Partial Alterations, A Life Safety Drawing of the the Space in question WITH the Ext'g conditions of the Abutting Space like rated assemblies and fire alarm or even Egress goes a long way to make the job easier to understand
 
Genduct said:
The advice I shared with the Design Professionals or the contractors who might provide a sketch is
The info you need to BID IT or BUILD IT is what I need to REVIEW IT.

For Partial Alterations, A Life Safety Drawing of the the Space in question WITH the Ext'g conditions of the Abutting Space like rated assemblies and fire alarm or even Egress goes a long way to make the job easier to understand
Click to expand...
PS Unless you like RFIs and Change Orders that really annoy the Owners
 
BayPointArchitect said:
They want to produce quality drawings that make the job of the plan reviewer easier.
Click to expand...
Documenting the code path you use will aid the plans examiner and reduce the time he/she will use to research and verify your design is code compliant
I have seen a lot of errors by designers, plans examiners and inspectors when they read a code section and apply it incorrectly to the project or inspection.
 
Everything involving the IEBC.......

301.1 General. The repair, alteration, change of occupancy,
addition or relocation of all existing buildings shall comply
with one of the methods listed in Sections 301.1.1 through
301.1.3 as selected by the applicant.

501.2 Work area. The work area, as defined in Chapter 2,
shall be identified on the construction documents.
 
I think the battle is won when I actually get a set of plans on paper. All these young bucks, which I doubt are on this site want to send it electronically and we would have to change some ordinaces to allow that. Our ordinace still requires mylars. I think myars came in around the time the Romans switched from lamb skin plans or maybe onion skin paper. Haven't seen a blue print paper for some time.

I still see a lot of cut and paste and plans that indicate another city or towns information which is very common. The designer needs to yell down the hall and ask the intern "Where's this project at?"

How many cities are there, called Springfield?
 
Pcinspector1 said:
How many cities are there, called Springfield?
Click to expand...
How many cities are named Springfield in the United States?
According to the U.S. Geological Survey there are currently 34 populated places named Springfield in 25 U.S. states throughout the United States, including five in Wisconsin; additionally, there are at least 36 Springfield Townships, including 11 in Ohio.
 
Mark, does your quote mean you agree that quality Drawings avoid RFIs and Change Orders OR that you think I am out to Lunch?
Wasn't sure if I should be flattered or embarrassed.
 
Cut-and-paste causes more problems than anything else in the design/engineering field these days! It would be nice if companies could turn off cut-and-paste and make all designs start from scratch. It would have everything make them take longer but the reduction of errors because of it may shake out to being a draw in the long run for many projects! I could give you many examples.
 
bill1952 said:
As a design consultant for 40 years, I agree. I blame CAD at least in part. With pen and ink or even pencil, you had to think before drawing, because later changes were so tedious. Not so with CAD. Coupled with expected expected time savings and the pressure to produce, drawings just got worse. And then the really experienced architects and engineers were often not proficient at CAD, so drawings were produced by the inexperienced. And the number of drawings increased exponentially, which diluted review.

I'm glad I retired.
Click to expand...
The number of drawings has exponentially increased - more stringent and numerous building codes are a big part of that. CAD/BIM is just a tool. I've also been in the situation where inspectors/reviewers have asked for exhaustively detailed drawings. Additionally construction/detailing has increased in complexity.
 
Noob said:
The number of drawings has exponentially increased - more stringent and numerous building codes are a big part of that. CAD/BIM is just a tool. I've also been in the situation where inspectors/reviewers have asked for exhaustively detailed drawings. Additionally construction/detailing has increased in complexity.
Click to expand...
Yep. with CAD you can make mistakes at the speed of light!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top