Open letter to my plan checker

[Architect1281]

Yikes

you really should consider it a compliment

Your plans were so good and the ink pad was in need of a workout

so rather than no it no exceptions taken I had the urege to be redundant

makes me feel needed

Thats why Leonardo has two Katanas

 

[jacs]

Dear plan submitter,

Please understand that we’ve already been down this road on multiple projects you’ve submitted. Understand that the phrases “built to code” or “to be determined” basically defeat the purpose of my review. If you know that it will be “built to code”, then show it on the plans. And understand that the “to be determined” time is here—determine it. Also, as much as I love hunting endlessly for your keynotes that are 10 pages ahead…I love it even more when you actually include the note you referenced. This will also cut down on your review time, in turn cutting down on your overall fees that you incessantly complain about. Oh, and one more thing—when you copy and paste plans/notes over previously submitted plans for you new submittal, keep in mind that we actually do look at your plans. When you can’t bother to get the address right, or include all the sheets on your index, that lack of attention makes me a little worried about your abilities to attentively adhere to the code.

Regards,

Plans Examiner

 

[pmarx]

The whole "as required" note thing really steams my oyster

I agree in certain cases but some things can and should fall under means and methods of the contractor. "Blocking as required" is an example. The "build per code" note does make me cringe though. It is the DP's responsibility to design the building per code. After the plans are reviewed and released by the AHJ the field inspector shouldn’t need to be concerned with much more than confirming the job is being built per the plans. I don’t mean to suggest that he shouldn’t be responsible to catch something that was missed during the review.

As for DPs (foreign or domestic) expecting the AHJ to do their job re code compliant design I think any agency that plays that game are being very foolish regardless of any pressure from complaints that they’re being “obstructionists”. It’s not their job to tell anyone how to design. You tell me, Mr. Architect or Mr. Engineer how you want to do it and I’ll tell you if it’s allowed…that’s it.

 

[Jobsaver]

Standard comments expediate. A phone call should proceed most other comments. Call me old-fashioned.

 

[Mark K]

Before the ICC I believe one of the model codes, not the UBC, had a provision that prohibited statements on the drawings that said "build per code".

 

[Forest]

"build per code" is a great note.As long as the contractor knows the code.Anyone taking odds on that bet.

 

[Yikes]

Before the ICC I believe one of the model codes, not the UBC, had a provision that prohibited statements on the drawings that said "build per code".

And yet "don't build per code" would have been a legitimately allowed statement?

 

[Yikes]

Standard comments expediate. A phone call should proceed most other comments. Call me old-fashioned.

Standard comments only expedite if they actually are applicable. What frustrates me is when the project already complies, but the standard corrections are slapped on the project anyway. That tells me the checker didn’t really look close at the plans in the first place.

If that’s the case, why not just give me the corrections the moment I tunr in the plans, and we can immediately do our backcheck appointment on-the-spot?

"build per code" is a great note.As long as the contractor knows the code. Anyone taking odds on that bet.

“build per code” is a perfectly fine note to have on the plans during construction. However, during plan check, the question is did we “design per code”?

 

[Mark K]

The problem with "build per code" is that it is not necessarily clear that there is agreement on how to interpret the code. What the inspector and contractor understand as code may not be what the plan checker and or design professional understand was intended.

It is the plan checkers responsibility to determine whether the design complies with the code.

 

[FyrBldgGuy]

How to pass the Plans Examiner Test... "Build per code" ... One answer to all questions.