Manage 2 set of the same plan?

[ACADuser]

Looking for any advice on a job I'm working on for an architect.
The owner keeps making changes even though the first floor (slab on grade) is done.
The house was permitted as a 3 story & is now a 2 story with changes to the 1st & 2nd floor.
The architect wants me to create 2 sets of plans. One for the building department with changes clouded for them.
The other set is for the builder to use in the field. BTW the first contractor was fired & so they want the new builder to get a fresh set of plan with only clouded items that took place after he got his first set of plans(the 2 story set).

My dilemma is do I create 2 sets of plan & layout OR do I have clouds & notes on 2 layers, one for the building department & one for the new GC?

 

Thanks

[Gawdzira]

I would manage this with 2 layout sets. The plans would be using "plan views" to manage the defaults.

[Chrisb222]

Personally I would not create 2 plan files. This can all be accomplished pretty easily with SPVs and custom layersets. Two plan files just invites a mistake.

[richoffan]

Don't know if you can make one plan read to (2) different layouts - never tried. I remember when you couldn't have two layouts open... I agree with Chris SPVs and layersets for what you want shown seems easiest and safest. Perhaps you can have one set from page one and the other further out say page 20.... and be mindful of the SPVs links to the layout

[GeneDavis]

Same footprint same foundation slab, but the project now has two floors but when permitted it was a three-story?  Sounds to me like the plans reviewer at the building department has to take a look at the whole thing, now that it is reduced in size.  Like, from scratch.  Elevations with a revision cloud around the space formerly occupied with the third floor?  Sounds silly to me.  A floor plan for floor three, a big revision cloud around it saying, "not to be done now" sounds like a recipe for confusion.

[ACADuser]

Thanks fellas.

The 3rd floor will never happen.

The plan reviewer will likely do a completely new review.

But the clouds must be used to show what changed on the 2 remaining floors.

Having said that it's silly IMO to cloud a majorly modified plan. too confusing.

 

[rgardner]

Honestly sounds like it should be a complete resubmittal with fresh set of plans showing what has been done and what is the actual proposed.  Remove previous plans from project completely.  The AHJ examiner should be on board with this seeing as to the fact there is SUBSTANTIAL structural and architectural changes.

[Alaskan_Son]

I have this almost exact same problem with one of my projects right now.  I went the direction of having 2 separate plans but I'm not convinced that was the best idea.  Its been a notable hassle keeping the 2 files in sync when we start making changes.  I think I should have used one plan along with Plan Views and CAD masks as necessary.  The main reason I went the 2 plan route is that one version of my plan needed to show some ADU's and the other needed to not show them.  Masking walls and cabinetry and such just seemed like too much of a pain.  If I'm understanding correctly, you wouldn't have that particular problem. 

[ACADuser]

In my case the Architect want the plans examiner to get a clouded version & only corrections requested by him added to his plan.

The contractor set would have no revision clouds as a clean beginning & clouds added after this date.

I would have to add changes & clouds to permit set only if they are code related.

I'm leaning toward separate layer sets in the same layout & plan but it may become impossible down the road.

[ValleyGuy]

1 hour ago, ACADuser said:

In my case the Architect want the plans examiner to get a clouded version & only corrections requested by him added to his plan.

The contractor set would have no revision clouds as a clean beginning & clouds added after this date.

I would have to add changes & clouds to permit set only if they are code related.

I'm leaning toward separate layer sets in the same layout & plan but it may become impossible down the road.

 

I had a similar experience. Before you do anything, maybe ask yourself how much liability / risk / anxiety / mess do you want to assume or take responsibility for? 

I'm making a few assumptions here, correct me if I'm wrong:

1) the obligation / contract / agreement surrounding the property owner and the building permit officials is between two different parties - not you.

2) the contract between the property owner and the 1st contractor was between two different parties - not you.

3) the contract between the property owner and the 2nd contractor is also between two different parties - not you.

See a trend, a great big mess was created between multiple other parties without your involvement. You probably completed the plan and fulfilled your obligation to the client....then things went to you know where in a hand basket.

In my case, I felt my contract to design and draft was fulfilled, everybody else had to put their Big Boy Pants on and accept their own involvement in making the mess, or in the new contractor's case - voluntarily stepping into this mess. My advice is for you is to find the last plan that the Building Official and Home Owner both have and agreed upon (revision # ???) and start from there with more revisions, thus letting the home owner keep the new contractor straight on what the two of them have agreed upon. OR  start with a fresh set of plans and let the property owner deal with the building permit implications. If your customer wishes you to draw a separate plan, I would suggest you treat it like brand new set of plans with an As-Built at the current state. Whatever he does with the documents from there is his own responsibility. Whatever he directs his contractor to build is his responsibility. Whatever trouble he gets into with the building officials is his responsibility. Legal binding agreements are currently in place between multiple parties. And if any one party takes a different party to court....I'm sure that you probably don't want to try and explain to the judge how you were cooking the books.

Bottom line, Use one plan only - the one that is a legal document with the building authority preferably.

 

Good luck with it.

[ACADuser]

Thanks for that good advice.

In this scenario, unlike most of my work, I am working for an Architect who pays me buy the job + hourly for changes.

As expected the GC is working for the Owner. So I'm a glorified drafter and the original drafter did the plans in Rivet Sept. 2018.

I worked on the plans converted to Autocad in 2019 & 2020. Then in 2021 I converted the plan to Chief as the revisions were getting too involved to continue in plain Autocad.

Here is the 3 story framing: https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/3d-framing-83d8d746ff9c43aea8fe3093ed64f7ba

Here is the 2 story exterior version https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/3d-overview-a7c93237f87a4770bd3ec4e5331a9796

 

The revision clouds are cluttering up an already clutter plan & the Architect wants to give the new GC a clean start for use in the field.

 

[GeneDavis]

Nice little place.  Steel roofing?  Cricketing ahead of that thru-wall feature, and the short parapet on the low side?

[ACADuser]

Thanks,

Yes but still working on the final details.

[ACADuser]

This is the next house.

https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/3d-9b1746801625449e9f953d0ab2c0c427