• Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


1 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

1528 profile views
  1. I'm looking for sample plans compatible with version 5. I have some, but seem to be missing some. Is there anywhere I can get those old versions (I have pdf versions, but am looking for plan and layout samples)?
  2. Kbird1 great idea to add in a continuous rail on the inside of the existing. Rennerrabbit Yes, this is cali. But all those french doors are on an enclosed porch. Original house walls have fewer windows. Drawings were submitted in 2001 and permit issued. Framing and plumbing were not to code but job completed anyway and permit never closed. One set of porch french doors had to be removed per fire inspector a month ago and left open for egress. Front porch was enclosed also with a window wall. No egress issues there. What a mess.
  3. Ah, yes. Good catch. The railing does go down to the lowest step in reality; just didn't draw it in there properly. The bottom two risers are the same height as the rest of the stairs, but they vary from the other treads too much. Also, the railing as built is not to code (I didn't draw that exactly as is, though, because I ran out of time and that's a tiime-consuming railing). So she'll see what the inspector says. There are many things that are not to code, but that's how I had to draw them; the inspector will point out the deficiencies. There are some other code violations! Like under-powered subpanel, wiring to old codes, venting issues, an egress window that was enclosed in another room, etc. The permits for the second floor were approved, and some of the items passed, but the plumbing and electrical were "not to code" and the permit was never closed out. But everything was covered! So the inspector might want some wall sections removed, maybe (I hope not) some flooring removed to see the plumbing and electrical. During the meetings, though, they said that since the bathrooms were used for the last 30 years with no obvious problems, they'll likely just let that slide. I'm pretty sure they'll have electrical redone as the codes have changed a lot since then.
  4. CARMELHILL, not sure what you mean. The risers are all the same. The landing is 55" by 44". We'll find out, though, as the plans go in this week for approval. Strange, getting permit approval for structures (the ENTIRE top floor) that have been around since 1987! Since my mother-in-law went into the hospital for a week over the stress all this has caused, they assure her that they will be lenient.
  5. Hah! Yes, Ridge_Runner, it's an outhouse! It's tied into the main sewer there. She used to have tumble-down sheds that a couple of guys lived in for awhile and so that toilet went in. Of course, it's one of the unpermitted things and raised a few eyebrows when the inspectors first saw it.
  6. I've done a dozen or so plans all the way to permit and construction drawings. I use these plan in-house so I haven't really worried too much about how long it takes to make them; I enjoy it and am a bit perfectionist so I'm not worried about that. But this time, my mother-in-law needed some help. She lives in a different state. Thirty years of multiple additions and alterations without the proper permits has landed her in hot water with the city (a silicon valley city that used to be a bit sleepy...). So, I offered to do her as-built and submission layouts to help with the impending fines and legal actions. She insisted I charge her for my work. I guess I'm slow, but the plans (and permit submissions) have taken about 200 hours! The home is two story with a cellar. It has six bedrooms, five bathrooms, a large deck off the upper floor, and a garage and other outbuildings. Measuring took extra time because she is a bit of a hoarder (which led to some violations in fact), and there were tenants in a few of the upstairs bedrooms. And she seemed to want things to be a bit more accurate than I would maybe have done in this case. I managed to use the layouts for three different permit correction submissions so that saved a bit of effort--several plan sets could be generated with the one plan and layout file. There were custom railings, a bit of detail around the front, various odd roofs, and the site plans were complicated by the fact that the city wanted every tree mapped, measured, and identified. I had a couple of meetings with city staff over plan drafts. I had to do some research about specific city requirements. I plan to reduce my hour count by 30% to account for some learning curves here and there. But, in your opinion, is 200 hours too much time? Am I just slow?
  7. I closed the layout and plan, re-opened, and the roof planes went away. Guess there's some odd bug in there.
  8. I send a floor plan to layout, creating a new layer set. No roof planes show up. Perfect. But then sometime later, when I load the layout sheet, there are roof planes there. So I double click on the layout box to load the original drawing and there are NO ROOF PLANES THERE! So somehow on my layout sheet the roof planes show up but when I double click they are turned off on the original drawing in the plan. A couple of times I've re-created the layout page all over again and the problem goes away--for awhile. Unfortunately, one sheet I have has about six different layout boxes that all show the roof planes. When I click on any one of them, the original drawing shows with the proper layout layerset with the roof planes are not selected. I close that window and the layout sheet reappears WITH the roof planes. I can recreate the sheet, but that means re-arranging all six layout boxes again and I'm just getting tired of doing this time and again. Not sure what else I can do. I'm still using X5 (just can't afford to upgrade).
  9. They are the built-in ones that came with x5. I have enclosed them. anno_set_x5.cadefs
  10. Thanks, Solver. I know of many other ways to accomplish things, so I will use those. This is the first time I've really delved into Annotation Sets, which is why I discovered this issue.
  11. Thanks glennw, I know all that. I can explain. I like Place Point because since I do a lot of asbuilt recreations, I might have a long list of measurements where I moved from point to point in the building. I can very easily recreate these points by using the "Input Point" tool. Then I can leisurely create parts of the building around these points. Finally, I can erase all the temporary points with one click. There are other situations where I just prefer to use them. That is not the...Point(!) Point Markers are harder to deal with for me so I don't really use them very often. I am aware of the many other ways to accomplish what I am doing, so I will use those. But what I discovered is certainly a bug. When I start a new drawing, I can snap to a Place Point on a drawing until I select certain built-in annotation sets, upon which time I cannot snap to any Place Point from then on, even when I close and reload the plan or select any other annotation set. That, I believe, is a bug.
  12. Broken again. This time I just start with a blank new plan. I place a "place point" (not a point marker). All is good. I can snap to that point. But as soon as I select an annotation set (other than the 1/4", 1/2", or 1/8", which work fine), the point can no longer be snapped to or selected, even if I select one of the three sets (1/4", 1/2", 1/8") that do not set off this behavior. The point is no longer selectable, period. This seems more like a true bug rather than user error, since I'm just using a blank plan. I also loaded a blank plan with a built-in profile and get the same result.
  13. So I got it to work by importing the layer set first, then the anno set, then copying/pasting the drawing. Hmm... Well, it works!
  14. I created a new plan, imported the anno and layer sets, then copied everything. Now the point are broken again!