All of what follows is intended for any of the folks who have made it this far and don’t know. Basically, for those more to the left on the learning curve.
So, while not technically incorrect, Mike Fromme’s roof specification is drawn poorly in my opinion. It’s ALWAYS rise over run, never run over rise. We were taught, for clarity, if for whatever reason you’re going to do vertical and horizontal lines to aid depicting roof slope, lead with the vertical line on the left side of the horizontal so it’s read naturally as rise over run. Who knows, maybe it’s a regional thing, or maybe it’s just how we were trained—whatever the case, it doesn’t lead to the conclusion that Mike offered replete with emoticons. Mike, we would call your assertion a non sequitur, as are many of your statements. I personally never do the lines, as I consider them rooky. I just write 10/12, because even nearly a decade ago with nearly no experience I was able to immediately grasp the full meaning without the aid of superfluous lines, but, by all means, do whatever floats your boat.
In any case, as Mike has demonstrated time and again, his willingness to make far-reaching assumptions (like I don’t know what I’m proposing because I would like input on securing plans, or I don’t know how to read plans) on scant “evidence” is only surpassed by his demonstrated naiveté in the HOA approval process. So you, dear reader, don’t fall into the trap of believing plans as simple as he outlines are a good idea or acceptable for the purposes of HOA and permit approves. I question whether Mike has ever completed a project involving an HOA. Mike, neither the county nor the HOA will accept a hand-drawn graph paper drawing depicting setbacks—maybe where you live, but not here.
This structure is not rocket science, but plans get everyone on the same page (no pun intended, I just can’t think of another way right now) before, during, and at completion of the project whether one hires a GC, subs, or does the entire project themselves. It’s also helpful (imperative for me) in generating an accurate materials list.
Maybe plans aren’t for everyone, but they shouldn’t be dismissed out of hand—doubly so as blind advice given to a person and situation Mike knows nothing about. They add considerable value for most.
As a homeowner I invite and appreciate inspections and the conversations that occur with the inspectors before hand—a practice I strongly encourage other homeowners to do if possible. I consider this process the cheapest double check by experienced, knowledgeable eyes on my planned and executed work that I could possibly ask for, even though the reality is that in my experience it’s the contractors who need the double checks. I’ve never had to make any changes to what I’ve done. The same cannot be said for the contractors I’ve worked with. I’ve had nothing but glowing remarks for workmanship and attention to detail from every one of my previous inspections, in part due to the planning process which includes the plans themselves. By the way, if you don’t have plans and hire a GC or subs I can’t imagine what your recourse would be if things didn’t turn out how you wanted.
Whatever you do, don’t believe that if you hire a contractor that you don’t need plans or don’t have anything to worry about. Clearly, for some, hiring a GC is the right or only move. If this is you, choose wisely. It seems to me there are way more bad ones (if you know what you’re looking at) than good ones.
