Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Peer Review for projects on soverign land

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
A plan checker is a an employee or sub-contractor to a local building
department (local government employee) whose responsiblity it is to check
construction documents for compliance to governing codes. Once the
verification process is completed and any corrections made, a permit is
issued which allows construction to begin.
With few exceptions, this is required of all structures in the United
States.
This is a very broad definition and I'm sure there are jurisdictions in the
states that have slightly different interpretations as to the responsiblity
of the plan checker. However, this is a correct definition in most major
cities.

Dennis S. Wish PE

-----Original Message-----
From: rodrigo lema [mailto:rodrigolema(--nospam--at)softhome.net]
Sent: Friday, September 18, 1998 12:35 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: Peer Review for projects on soverign land


hi, i´m from argentina and i would appreciate if you could briefly explain
to me what  a "plan checker" is
thanks
rodrigo lema
-----Mensaje original-----
De: Dennis S. Wish PE <wish(--nospam--at)cwia.com>
Para: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Fecha: viernes 11 de septiembre de 1998 4:47
Asunto: RE: Peer Review for projects on soverign land


>Thanks Donn for your comments. I wasn't concerned about the design code - I
>intend to follow the '94 UBC or even the '97 where I feel it is relevent.
My
>question is about the lack of plan checking and my desire to use SEAOSC as
a
>peer review service. I believe, for a fee, certain members of SEAOSC will
>review a project and provide a peer report.
>I would have more faith in a review performed by SEAOSC than I would paying
>a contract plan service like Wildan or Esgil. I don't mean to imply that
>Wildan or Esgil would not perform appropriately or professionally. I *did*
>mean to imply that a peer review by SEAOSC would be more credible if we
were
>ever sued and brought to a tribal court. My reasoning is that the review
>would come from a professional organization which is known for their active
>participation in the creation of the codes used in the design of these
>strutures and as such would be testifying that the the design was done in
>accordance with the provision of the code.
>On the other side, using SEAOSC as a peer review agency creates a better
>chance to find potential problems before they occur in construction.
>Again, I need to preface that I don't have any less faith in plan check
>agencies, but I feel that SEAOSC peer review would provide a more intensive
>design review possibly by those with more understanding of the intention of
>the code.
>
>Respectfully
>Dennis Wish PE
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: donn wooldridge [mailto:"cdonngo(--nospam--at)primenet.com"@primenet.com]
>Sent: Thursday, September 10, 1998 6:09 PM
>To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
>Subject: Re: Peer Review for projects on soverign land
>
>
>Dennis S. Wish PE wrote:
>>
>> I figured this might get a few interested people:>)
>> I have a potential project for a local indian tribe. Because the work is
>to
>> be done on tribal land, there is no requirment for plan check or
>compliance
>> to local building codes. I have done this before, but only small simple
>> block buildings where I followed UBC and had no liability.
>> My latest project is a very creative architectural piece which is to be
>used
>> for a Visitor Center and Pedestrian Bridge across a shallow arroyo. As
>> before, there is no plan check cycle on this project.
>>
>> I am not comfortable with this even though I have confidence in the
>ability
>> of the members of the team I put together to design the structures. I
>> suggested to the architect that I would want to approach my local SEA
>> chapter (SEAOSC) and ask for a peer review council to review the work
>before
>> I seal it. It seemed a reasonable request considering the potential
>> liability issues.
>>
>> Although I have heard that SEAOSC offers the service, I have no
experience
>> with it and wanted to obtain the opinions of others. The architect agrees
>> with the idea but is hesitant to do any thing that might delay his
>> accelerated design schedule. My design window is less than five weeks and
>we
>> have not agreed upon a fee or have a signed contract as yet.
>>
>> I perfer using SEAOSC if the services are offered since the credability
of
>> the reviews is important should this ever get litigated. I don't believe
>> that I would get the same level of review or credibility if I were to
>> suggest paying for a private plan check from a contract agency.
>>
>> I would appreciate opinions on this issue.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Dennis S. Wish PE
>>
>DENNIS:
>
>YOU "MUST" DESIGN ACCORDING TO SOME RECOGNIZABLE AND ACCEPTED CODE EVEN
>IF NOT DICTATED BY THE OWNER, AS IT MAY BECOME NECESSARY EVEN IN A
>TRIBAL COURT.
>
>DONN
>
>
>
>
>
>