Construction Docs Development


Recommended Posts

Call your jurisdiction and ask them to send you their "plan check list".

I've seen them 5 pages and I've seen them 50 pages.

No need to supply more than they want, and at the same time you don't want a correction list that takes as long to do as the original plan set.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 101
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The American Craftsman set is a few years old. Here is a newer project, and an updated look at my plans.    https://www.dropbox.com/s/83lzkad9n9zki4w/Plan Set 6_8_16_PROOF SET.pdf?dl=0

Just thought of something look at Joey Martins plans on the sample plans his layout format for residential is  awesome...

Sorry to be late to the party but this topic has morphed into a direction that peaked my interest.   I got a associates degree from a trade school in Phx Az 30 years ago with the promise tha

Posted Images

Quote

No need to supply more than they want,

I should state for the record, that this is an issue for me. I rarely...if ever...produce a set of plans based on what the jurisdiction want's to see. The purpose of a good set of home plans, as I see it, is to convey your design ideas to the builder. Of course you need a permit, and there will be items that need to be included in order to obtain that permit, but to suggest that we should do no more than that is a great disservice to everyone involved in the process. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, dshall said:

 

Joey,  you are correct,  the more info you provide for the homeowner/builder,  the better for them....   we should always provide enough info for the builder.

 

 This includes showing trusses on roof plans,  which will show girder trusses,  which have point loads that need to be taken into account on headers,  or any additional point loads on foundation due to the vertical load of the girder truss......  and then we need to detail retaining walls,  and be aware if they are retaining walls or restraining walls, and detail on the wall detail which side of wall the vertical steel needs to be on,  we all know that sometimes the vertical steel is on the dirt side and sometimes on the basement side,  and then we need to be able to show where the hold downs are and the size of them including the type of shear wall they need to use.

 

Joey is absolutely correct,  the more info you put on the plans,  the fewer questions there will be out in the field.  But I do not understand how they were able to build homes out here in Cali 40 years ago with the plans I have seen that they built off of. 

Did you forget that we were drawing 40 years ago, 2 page plans for large 2 story's. Those were the good old days.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct Scott. But again, if there are no girders resting on headers, and the retaining walls are designed and detailed to exceed code based on soil conditions, even without any steel at all (yes..some places build retaining walls up to 96" in height without any steel at all!!! e-gats), then you are golden.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You all are making great cases for detailing the plans.  Clarity is always the better.  No doubt.  However, Do you ever consider how much liability you may be taking on by detailing the plans?  And/or...are you paid enough to take on this liability.  In Indiana...a lot of builders just don't want to pay for you to take the time to detail their plans...they kind of make it up as they go.   

 

Also...just from experience.  I'm not sure people working in the field actually review and use all the details you may show on the plans.  I can't begin to tell you how many times I walked on to a job and a subcontractor was fabricating or installing something incorrectly.  When asked if they had looked at the plans...inevitably their answer was..."we are doing it the way we always do".   Arrrrrr.....no wonder my hair is gray.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Around here if you change anything from the permit set, you have to go back and change the plan re-engineer it, and re-submit to the building dept. No changes allowed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not concerned about the liability. I carry E&O that I have never had to use, and well thought out planning and con docs take care of that stuff.

 

As for Scott, he is using backhanded sarcasm to insinuate that, even though my plans look good, there is no way I have thought through the engineering, or have taken into account the various loads, especially the trusses even though the plans clearly state that the trusses are shown for illustration purposes only, and the truss company is to provide all truss plans and drawings.

 

As for the builders, I state on the plans that if a change is made they need to contact me, or assume any/all liability for said change.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DRAWZILLA said:

Around here if you change anything from the permit set, you have to go back and change the plan re-engineer it, and re-submit to the building dept. No changes allowed.

 

Structural changes might require some department notification...but not always.  However, what about the size or location of a bulkhead or some variance of an exterior trim detail or cabinet layout.  Builders here in Indy make these types of changes everyday - all day.  We are still "free men" in Indiana...to some degree. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

to suggest that we should do no more than that is a great disservice to everyone involved in the process

 

Joey:  I had builders make me take out "stuff" as they had to submit the permits and they didn't want to

complicate the process and slow it down etc

 

time and again they said only put in what they permit office wants and nothing more

 

Lew

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, lbuttery said:

to suggest that we should do no more than that is a great disservice to everyone involved in the process

 

Joey:  I had builders make me take out "stuff" as they had to submit the permits and they didn't want to

complicate the process and slow it down etc

 

time and again they said only put in what they permit office wants and nothing more

 

Lew

Using plans simply as a tool to "get a permit" is not the same as what they will be held to be in a court of law (if it ever comes to that), i.e. a set of contract documents between the builder and the customer, and probably more important than any actual paper named a "contract" that they sign. Just like a contract prepared by an attorney, if the documents are sloppily drafted with major omissions, it is the drafter who may ultimately suffer.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SNestor said:

 

Structural changes might require some department notification...but not always.  However, what about the size or location of a bulkhead or some variance of an exterior trim detail or cabinet layout.  Builders here in Indy make these types of changes everyday - all day.  We are still "free men" in Indiana...to some degree. 

Well , at least here, no changes what so ever, but it is really up to the building inspector ,and they always make you change the plan to take any liability off them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Richard_Morrison said:

No evidence he graduated is not the same as "didn't graduate." Especially, considering that he was then allowed to enroll in college.

Agreed . My point was even though someone has a certification or stamp does not make them good at what they do. Sure learning the backgrounds, systems, theory's and the like is all relevant one must know how to accomplish the task. This, in my opinion, can only be achieved through experience. Just having a stamp means nothing. There are lots of bad builders with a license, and lots of bad architects and designers. I can remember one time when I was building, the plans were so bad I actually set them on fire in the street in front of supervisors and the architect and said you guys build it. Really it's the endeavor to constantly learn and grow. I'm humble enough to know no one person can know everything. Don't get me wrong I have the up most respect for anyone architect, designer, builder or laborer that can prove himself in the field.  But to say anyone is any better than anyone else just because of a stamp, a Ferrari or something else is wrong in my opinion. look at Michael's son with the legos ...now where is that boys stamp? 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DRAWZILLA said:

Around here if you change anything from the permit set, you have to go back and change the plan re-engineer it, and re-submit to the building dept. No changes allowed.

You can't even change a window size without approval here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Richard_Morrison said:

Using plans simply as a tool to "get a permit" is not the same as what they will be held to be in a court of law (if it ever comes to that), i.e. a set of contract documents between the builder and the customer, and probably more important than any actual paper named a "contract" that they sign. Just like a contract prepared by an attorney, if the documents are sloppily drafted with major omissions, it is the drafter who may ultimately suffer.

 

And Richard is so right on this one. Heed the warning. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/2/2017 at 7:06 AM, dshall said:

a comment.....  Joey does a great looking set of plans.... I have always admired his set of plans,  they are so clean looking and not cluttered compared to mine....   however based on my experience,  he would never be able to pull a permit in California with them.  

 

Just a few examples....  footing widths are not specified and there are no shear transfer details,  window headers are not spec'd and hip sizes are not called out and there are not king posts under ridge beams spec'd out.  Location of vertical steel in retaining walls is not spec'd......   plate heights in sections are not called out and there are only 2 sections ,  for a house this size and complex,  it seems more than 2 sections will be needed.

 

I suppose the point of the  post is,  you need to understand what the permitting jurisdiction will require.  Simply copying someone's method will not always guarantee a permit.  I began drawing plans in Houston back in the '70's and Joey's plans would be considered very nice and adequate........  40 years later in California..... much more info is required .

 

Energy calcs,  structural calcs,  truss calcs,  BMP plans,  Brush Management plans,  coverage calcs,  FAR calcs,  impervious area calcs and  keeping the wife happy calcs not to mention  plans to assure your kids success in life calcs.  

 

Anybody in California with little to no experience who thinks they can provide a set of plans ,  will be in for a big surprise.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So when the heck is the brush management plan been in effect?  I've only ever seen it drawn in commercial only? Is SD making you do this for residential?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dssharp said:

So when the heck is the brush management plan been in effect?  I've only ever seen it drawn in commercial only? Is SD making you do this for residential?

 

Yes,  we are doing it for residential.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 if the documents are sloppily drafted with major omissions, it is the drafter who may ultimately suffer

 

Richard:

 

we have had this discussion about "transfer of liability" many times before over the past decade

 

not going there again ...

 

Lew

Link to post
Share on other sites

Liability & Contract law is convoluted with no precise outcome. I have an E&O insured legal entity, dbl asset protection. 

 

Jurisdiction doing plan reviews to a point can be a good thing, rather than no checker function at all like here for E&O. We find out at the job site. 

 

Sounds like builder QA issues. One way to resolve that & keep everyone out of trouble is have PMs do sub-inspections denoted on the drawing's. Make it more a "Design-Build" package vs just design thrown over the fence. The designer/architect/PE in coordination w/builders and their trades are the most qualified to determine those critical I like to call "key" inspection features I put in flag notes on my drawings as inspection points tied to production planning most of which is also on my drawing's. That's what I do and I require inspection stamps be submitted by each trade before a completion cert and payment is issued. I design high performance homes QA is a must or they don't perform as designed or to my energy models. One thing nice about being a Design-Build Firm with some in-house employees is we have better QC. 

 

More I think about it I'm going to sequence my sheets in order of build, an integration concept knows as "Design as Built" basically the drawing shts now have a split roles, design def and build planning. I'll try and get it so each sheet gets stamped off as planning. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to be late to the party but this topic has morphed into a direction that peaked my interest.

 

I got a associates degree from a trade school in Phx Az 30 years ago with the promise that I could get a job using AutoCAD.

After living in the big city for those 2 years I realized that city life and a desk job was not for me- so I moved back to Central Oregon and got into the construction industry as a carpenter.

I had spent the majority of my working life building custom homes and running crews in all phases of structural construction.

The experience that gave me has proven invaluable as I transformed my contracting business into a design/ build company- with CA being a huge factor.

( I doubt I could have done it with AutoCAD- to me CA was building a house, just using different tools.)

 

My long winded way around to this point is I feel like anyone who is going to offer design services should have had some sort of field experience so they can understand that no matter what we draw or what jurisdiction stamps it- some poor guy has to put it together.;)

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rob:

 

I agree, building experience is "vital"

 

I don't have it - but my partner did

 

without him I would have never started the design business

and if I had I would have soon been out of business

 

Lew

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, RL-inc said:

My long winded way around to this point is I feel like anyone who is going to offer design services should have had some sort of field experience so they can understand that no matter what we draw or what jurisdiction stamps it- some poor guy has to put it together.;)

 

Do you believe than an oncologist should have had some sort of cancer to know what their patients are going through? And do you believe that anyone offering design services should also have some formal design training in addition to field experience?

 

I think that anyone offering design services should have enough real-world experience to understand the ramifications of their design decisions. Yes, someone has to put it together, but I'm not sure that the ability to use a framing square or frame a hog valley is essential.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, ICTHOMES said:

Liability & Contract law is convoluted with no precise outcome. I have an E&O insured legal entity, dbl asset protection. 

 

Sorry, but for claims involving design negligence, corporate entities offer no liability protection.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
  • Member Statistics

    29611
    Total Members
    9156
    Most Online
    KentGoodrich
    Newest Member
    KentGoodrich
    Joined