• 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

Should Plan Examiners be Architects & Engineers?

CityKin

CityKin

Registered User
Joined
Sep 13, 2016
Messages
110
Location
Cincinnati
Ohio requires that all Master Plan Examiners (MPE's) be licensed architects or engineers. It also requires that we pass the ICC tests and have 30 hours of training every other year. This is the only position in a building department where this is a requirement. It is not required for CBOs or other personnel.

Some smaller and mid-size building departments are lobbying the state to remove the engineer/architect requirement.

They say in their request that only 3 states in the US have the architect/engineer requirement.

They also say that in 18 states, passing the ICC tests is the only requirement.

Since this board seems to have code professionals from all over the country, I'm interested in your perspective/opinion. Should Ohio remove the licensure requirement for MPE's?
 
1 seems like it would be hard to find enough people with all those requirements

2 when you do find them, can a city pay them enough and enough to keep them

Have seen the same thing with fire protection engineers

3 at least with icc cert, they might open a code book for the test, they might know what it says, they might know how to apply it
 
From the bright side of the counter I've found that all plan checkers are now engineers, in fact most structural engineers, probably because of California's strict seismic requirements. In fact most SEs now design in computer programs, I think all building departments should own the various programs, I had a case where the plan checker claimed she knew how to run the programs but didn't have the particular program my SE used in the design so he required nodal points be added, that didn't seem to work so she required I bring my engineer come in with the program on his laptop so they could work on the plan check together. With the amounts of money we pay for plan check and permits the departments should pay for the programs and people licensed and trained to operate them. Architects no, I see no advantage to the plan checker being an architect.
 
CityKin, the statement reads "master plans examiner" so can one be a plans examiner in Ohio without being a master of all trades? Can you have a department with trade specific certified plans examiners?

I don't see the benefit of mandating a Licensed Architect however I do understand the range of added knowledge an Architect may have over a certified plans examiner. With that said I would like to see a minimum of on the job training, trade or schooling requirements to perform the job of inspector and plan reviewer at a minimum in the commercial level of inspections.

In Pennsylvania, take the ICC tests and you my friend can become a plan reviewer and building inspector too...
 
It's up to the municipality here. Larger municipalities get many more large projects and have the larger tax base to support a licensed professional to perform these duties. Smaller municipalities see fewer projects requiring these professionals, so this becomes less of a requirement for them.

In Canada, the courts scale the duty of care imposed on the municipality with the size of the municipality. Small towns are able to rely on what the owner's consultants have designed provided they have reviewed the submission to the best of their ability. Large municipalities must have their own professionals on staff and are less able to rely on the owner's consultants. Again, the building inspection staff do not have to be engineers or architects, but must posses dedicated training on the areas they are inspecting.
 
I think it's a giant waste of time and completely unnecessary. The budget problems aside, what greater purpose/greater security does it serve? Does an engineer reviewing an engineer make for a better review? How do you quantify that?

Can you read a set of blueprints? Can you read and understand the Code you're enforcing? Can you put those two skills together and then write down anything that's wrong with the plans? Good, you're hired.

I see it as similar to our really, really, really stupid plumbing requirements here: Plumbers are State licensed. In order to inspect plumbing, you must be a licensed plumber. No exceptions. You can't take the tests, you can't be exempted for education or experience, nothing. Serve a four year apprenticeship (which is dumb beyond all belief, and a whole 'nother conversation), pay a fee, then take the test to become a plumber, pay another fee, then take another test to be a plumbing inspector, and then you can inspect plumbing. It's about as over-reaching as a gov't. can make themselves. And does jumping through all those hoops make the plumbing in IL any better than it is in a State with less restrictive requirements? Does it serve the people of the State better than letting municipal inspectors actually inspect what they're paid to inspect? Is water going to suddenly start running up hill if a guy who doesn't go through all the BS looks at it? I kinda' doubt it....
 
conarb said:
From the bright side of the counter I've found that all plan checkers are now engineers, in fact most structural engineers, probably because of California's strict seismic requirements. In fact most SEs now design in computer programs, I think all building departments should own the various programs, I had a case where the plan checker claimed she knew how to run the programs but didn't have the particular program my SE used in the design so he required nodal points be added, that didn't seem to work so she required I bring my engineer come in with the program on his laptop so they could work on the plan check together. With the amounts of money we pay for plan check and permits the departments should pay for the programs and people licensed and trained to operate them. Architects no, I see no advantage to the plan checker being an architect.
Click to expand...

You know what that would mean to the SE consultant? Rather than the municipality buying all the programs they would need, they would buy one and dictate what program the submission must be in. And all the municipalities would get together and decide on one program right?... Yeah, no. You think you've argued with a building inspector? Get two building inspectors who disagree with each other together.
 
Keystone said:
CityKin, the statement reads "master plans examiner" so can one be a plans examiner in Ohio without being a master of all trades? Can you have a department with trade specific certified plans examiners?
...
Click to expand...
Currently in Ohio, you can be an Electrical, Plumbing or Mechanical plans examiner without being an architect or engineer, but to be a MPE, you must be a licensed A/E. State law also requires that every certified building department have at least one MPE under direct employment or as a contract employee. Most building departments want only MPE's because they can do all plan examination, including fire suppression and commercial building. I thought this was a common requirement around the country. Interesting that we are the exception, not the rule.
 
It depends upon where in Ohio, seismologists say the New Madrid quake is long overdue.

iu
 
Here in NM most jurisdictions don't have dedicated plan examiners, the CBO or Inspector and sum places zoning do all the plan examinations.
 
steveray said:
Kinda like an architect or engineer does not guarantee you will get a good set of plans...Doesn't mean you will get a good review either...
Click to expand...


This is a pretty thankless job, and has no built-in, everyday joy. It's decent pay and I'm mostly out of the weather, but that's about as joyous as it gets.

But then, every once in a while, I get a set of plans from an engineer who thinks his _ _ _ _ don't stink and that I couldn't possibly be smart enough to catch something wrong on his plans. Those are joyous, happy days. :)
 
CityKin said:
Currently in Ohio, you can be an Electrical, Plumbing or Mechanical plans examiner without being an architect or engineer, but to be a MPE, you must be a licensed A/E. State law also requires that every certified building department have at least one MPE under direct employment or as a contract employee. Most building departments want only MPE's because they can do all plan examination, including fire suppression and commercial building. I thought this was a common requirement around the country. Interesting that we are the exception, not the rule.
Click to expand...


I was wondering if a MPE did all the plan review or they had help.


Do some cities cheat, have a MPE on retainer and city employees do most of the work??
 
Rick18071 said:
Seems like I would be very expensive to just get a simple plan review for a deck in Ohio.
Click to expand...

Residential plan exam does not require an MPE. There is a separate certification for Residential Plan Examiner and even for Residential Building Departments. Residential plans are often reviewed by the residential inspector.
 
cda said:
I was wondering if a MPE did all the plan review or they had help.
Do some cities cheat, have a MPE on retainer and city employees do most of the work??
Click to expand...

I've submitted plans in lots of jurisdictions in Ohio, and I've never seen this. Small jurisdictions will often have a CBO/MPE/BI who is only in one or two days a week and does zoning, plan review and inspections. 100% of the time I have submitted commercial plans for review in Ohio, they have been reviewed by an architect or an engineer who is also an MPE.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cda
When you are required to design to higher seismic standards steel is almost always used in residential, at least a few moment frames at a minimum, are you qualified to check column to beam connections, this requires special inspections but that's just the field work, not the plan check. I've venture to say that in remodeling, especially brick/masonry steel moment frames are always used.
 
^ if you started talking moment frames and special inspections for residential work in Ohio people would look at you cross-eyed. All residential here is wood with OSB sheathing for wind load. 100%

If you get into the older cities we actually have tons of solid masonry bearing wall single family houses and townhouses, but again, for renovations, there is typically no special inspections or steel. Yes engineers are involved for larger, taller, or higher end renovations when the architects try to create more open space inside an old building, but there is no requirement in the Residential Code for special inspections.
 
CityKin said:
^ if you started talking moment frames and special inspections for residential work in Ohio people would look at you cross-eyed. All residential here is wood with OSB sheathing for wind load. 100%
Click to expand...

We looked at them cross-eyed when it hit here in 1997, I know engineers who think the most important thing in the world is bringing the midwest up to seismic requirements. After the recent Napa earthquake our city (an older town with brick buildings) finally decided to get tough and red tagged most of the buildings in town, it became a ghost town with even McDonald's and The Bank of America moving out, it's just starting to come back to life with new businesses moving in but at drastically increased rents.

..but there is no requirement in the Residential Code for special inspections.
Click to expand...

It may be a California amendment but the CRC defaults to Chapter 17 in the CBC when it comes to special inspections.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top