] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

[Mark Codispoti <coldspot(--nospam--at)accessone.com>]

Tom,
I recently have added the following language, or something similar, to
my
agreements and have had no negative feed back regarding.

"Any structurally related omissions disclosed during the plan check
review process will be addressed within the terms of the above fee
schedule.  Any clarifications not requiring substantive structural
design changes will be an equally shared expense for CCC and the
client.  There shall be a "xx"  hour accommodation for clarifications
prior to charging for such work."

The "xx" number of hours becomes a function of the scope of the job
and the propensity for severity of scrutiny  I have previously
encountered with the reviewing jurisdiction.  From my experiences in
the Seattle, area it seems the plan checks performed by contract
checkers are the by far the most rigorous and most time ($$)
consuming.  For the type of work I do, "giving" 2-4 hours seems to be
a fair amount of time.

It can be difficult to collect when I  work with Architects who tend
to overly blame themselves for any plan check item.   Often the
architect will agree to jump through any hoop, however high,  and at
no charge to the client.   Knowing I have budgeted the couple of hours
to respond to the plan check makes that loss of billing time a little
easier to digest.

Regards,
Mark Codispoti

HARRISENGR(--nospam--at)aol.com wrote:

>      I have recently noticed at the back of soil reports for my
> projects that
> some soil engineering firms include language that says the report
> scope of
> services does not include time for responses to government agency
> comments,
> and responses will be at additional hourly rates.    It used to be a
> soil
> report was never questioned here, but since the earthquake, some
> jurisdictions have been having soil engineering consultants plan
> check the
> submitted soil reports.
>      This seems appropriate to me.
>      My standard practice has been to include building department
> plan check
> comment responses as part of the original fee. The problem is , some
>
> jurisdictions regularly approve my plans with minor or no comments
> while
> others can create hours of engineering time and days of drafting
> time (
> $1000s).  On the other hand, I have plan checked over 5000 plans in
> 13 years
> as a contract plan check engineer so i know this is not unique to
> me.
>      I think it would be fair to follow the soil engineers and
> charge hourly
> for plan check comments but I can see resistance to change.
>      I would really appreciate hearing what others are doing.
>      Most of my work is type V and III.
>
>      Thanks in advance.
>
>      Tom Harris, SE
>      Thousand Oaks, CA
>
>
>