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

RE: Plan Checking

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Bob:


Locally we do not tell the designer how to design but the plan check is more
than seeing that the engineer stamped the plans.  The review is to verify
the engineer of record designed in accordance with the code which is the
law.   

Let's qualify between plan checkers and Plan Review Engineers.  I am
perfectly capable of reviewing plans and calculations for compliance with
the code.  It isn't reviewing every nook and cranny, it is doing an
appropriate review for the situation.  

I think you must have had a bad experience, sorry about that.  A review is
not a personal attack, it is some dude doing thier job just like you are
doing yours.  The only reason there is structural plan review locally is
that the engineers want it, if the engineers stop wanting it then I guess I
could always bag groceries based on my qualifications.


Respectfully,


Scott M Haan P.E.
Plan Review Engineer
Building Safety Division http://www.muni.org/building
Development Services Department
Municipality of Anchorage
phone:907-343-8183  fax:907-249-7399
mailto:haansm(--nospam--at)ci.anchorage.ak.us


>  -----Original Message-----
> From: 	Bob Hanson [mailto:Bobh(--nospam--at)caa-online.com] 
> Sent:	Wednesday, May 02, 2001 9:49 AM
> To:	seaint list
> Subject:	Plan Checking
> 
> List,
> What or where is the line on what a structural plan check is supposed to
> provide. I have seen plan checks that check nearly nothing and the
> response is "you are stamping the drawings not me" to the far end of spell
> check. Does ICBO have a standard of performance? My view is plan check
> should try to catch gross errors, point to code sections that may not have
> been considered, and verify that there is enough information or quality
> into the documents to provide life safety and for the inspector to spot
> items of importance. If the EOR differs in his opinion on code sections we
> have a dilemma.  I think for the most part that a plan checker can not
> master all the materials and all the structure types nor be a master
> draftsperson/spelling checker. I feel it is the EOR with his nitch who
> should know every code item related to his submittal. If the EOR has a
> problem with what is required in the code he should not look to shoot the
> messenger.  In the case of a dilemma, or in the case of the EOR not
> feeling compliance is required(blatant items excepted) I think the EOR
> should be in control. Opinions?
> Bob Hanson, S.E.

* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org