1. ATTENTION returning members. If you are coming here from the old forum for the first time, you will need to reset you password. However, we had an email problem getting password reset links set out to a lot of the email addresses. That problem is temporarily rectified but IF you still have an issue, email me direct at info@thebuildingcodeforum.com and I will give you a temporary password.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. 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 clicking here: Upgrades
    Dismiss Notice

Why draw it on a sheet when it can be written out???

Discussion in 'Plan Review Topics' started by Simonsays, Aug 12, 2019.

  1. Simonsays

    Simonsays Bronze Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    0
    What are the feelings out there when revised drawings are returned for re-review now with narrative paragraphs headed by code section numbers instead of drawn plans, sections, and details?
     
  2. jar546

    jar546 *****istrator

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    6,818
    Likes Received:
    467
    I'm going to get some popcorn for this thread discussion. This should be good.

    My opinion (humble):

    No go. Am I suppose to mark only part of the drawings superseded then put notes referring to the new notes on separate paper? NFW.

    I think, however, that there are times for clarification purposes this can be ok with limited allowance. Provide new drawings with clouded areas.
     
    Ty J. likes this.
  3. tmurray

    tmurray Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    Messages:
    1,643
    Likes Received:
    432
    I agree with Jeff. We need to think about the end user in the field. They are not reading the code in between driving nails. Interpreting a legal standard is not their strong suit, even if they are familiar with parts of it as part of their trade. It should be drawn out so they can see what the intent is. To say nothing of if the plans and "spec" is now conflicting.

    Why not just hand the trades a code book and say "built it".
     
    jar546 likes this.
  4. Ty J.

    Ty J. Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2017
    Messages:
    511
    Likes Received:
    213
    IF the narrative simply indicates how the existing details comply, I'd say that it is ok (presuming plans examiner/BO agree and drop the correction requirement).

    However, if the detail is missing components or is wrong in any way, then attaching a written description "fixing" it is not going to fly. Contractor will look at the detail, build it per the detail, and be none the wiser that the detail was wrong and that the supplemental note had the "right" way to do it.
     
    tmurray, Pcinspector1 and jar546 like this.
  5. e hilton

    e hilton Bronze Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2014
    Messages:
    276
    Likes Received:
    55
    Depends on the intent of the resubmission. If it is to show the plan reviewer why the detail is correct, thats ok. Probably better done in a sit-down meeting. Go through all the “corrections” , agree which are acceptable, then submit clean drawings suitable for the knuckle-dragging apes on site.
     
  6. Pcinspector1

    Pcinspector1 Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2009
    Messages:
    2,989
    Likes Received:
    391
    You know the plans are already out to bid, don't you?
     
  7. Ty J.

    Ty J. Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2017
    Messages:
    511
    Likes Received:
    213
    That is one of my "favorite" comments to hear.... as if that has any bearing.

    Once had an architect call for a fire wall based upon the code analysis, but the engineer detailed for a fire barrier with no structural independence. Not only had it gone to bid, but the steel package had been ordered.
     
  8. TheCommish

    TheCommish Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    808
    Likes Received:
    111
    2015 IBC note the word show, and as determined by the Building Official. I determine narratives give us an idea of the scope and intent of the project, the plan shows with clarity how the work is to be done. For example on a set of steel detail drawings the weld size and type is shown on the drawing, the specification of the weld is found in the standard.

    upload_2019-8-12_20-20-29.png
     

    Attached Files:

  9. steveray

    steveray Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2009
    Messages:
    6,427
    Likes Received:
    849
    As long as the information is understandable, I am good with it.....I had an old time Frenchie carpenter write out all of his lumber and spans for an addition for plan review and it came out beautifully. Accepting just code sections would be like accepting an application that says "built to code" not going to happen...The contractor has to be responsible for some code knowledge, but the designer needs to produce a reasonable drawing as well...
     
  10. ADAguy

    ADAguy Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2013
    Messages:
    3,464
    Likes Received:
    312
    3 flavors:
    1. Code minimum (design/build contractor - I don't need no stinking plans, will do it "my way anyway")
    2 Bidable with specs to establish level of quality
    3. Buildable as in with enough plans and details that it will almost stand up in court.
     

Share This Page