Home Subscribe Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri

News
May. 03, 2008
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

CORRECTION -- 05/06/08 -- In a story about structural inspections that was published in Saturday’s Review-Journal, the first name of Richard McHale, of McHale Consulting, was reported incorrectly.

LV has scrapped some structural inspections

By VALERIE MILLER and JOAN WHITELY
REVIEW-JOURNAL

The city of Las Vegas is no longer conducting structural reviews on some buildings as tall as four stories, strip malls, tract homes and big-box stores such as Costco.

Unlike Clark County and nearby cities, the Las Vegas Department of Building and Safety is relying on the word of the architects and engineers submitting plans that their buildings meet specifications and will not collapse from gravity, high wind or seismic activity. The move, detailed in an April 11 city document, puts those larger structures in the same category as carports, gazebos and balconies.

The new guidelines were issued in the midst of the Las Vegas building department's elimination of 31 positions because of the construction slowdown. The city has laid off four of its five structural plan reviewers.

City officials said the layoffs were necessary because the department, which was designed to be self-supporting from inspection and other fees, was running at a deficit which would amount to $5.7 million through the end of this year. The reductions cut that deficit more than $4 million to about $1.5 million, city spokesman Jace Radke said.


Most Popular Stories
  • MOUNT CHARLESTON: Four die in plane crash
  • Two couples died in crash
  • NORM: Steve Wynn goes for mega-yacht
  • FAMILY SERVICES: Three visits preceded boy's death
  • NORM: Kirshner works on big Vegas project
  • NORM: Playboy models in state spotlight
  • NORM: Curtain falling on Stage Deli
  • Body of diver who jumped off 90-foot Lake Mead cliff found
  • NORM: Playboy 'coed': Dad's OK with it
  • NORM: Elvis fan club will have star its way



    • Some people, including Scott Canepa, a local attorney who has litigated some of the valley's biggest home defect cases, believes the city's cost-cutting move could create more problems for local residents. He suggested eliminating the reviews would lead to more litigation over construction defects.

    "I don't know how on Earth they could exclude single-family dwellings from (structural) plans checks," he said. "Basically, there have been a slew of problems."

    Homeowners, already cash-strapped, often have insurance policies that don't cover structural defects that aren't life-threatening safety hazards.

    "Certainly, it could lead to significant property damage and even personal injury," he said.

    Local resident Gary Wright, who brought the new procedure to the newspaper's attention, is also outraged by the city's decision.

    "If it's any type of structure that could fall or collapse or fail, if the potential is there for pain or loss of life, then it ought to be reviewed," said Wright, a former Las Vegas building inspector and plans examiner. He left the city on a medical retirement in 2006, and is involved in legal actions regarding both his former employment and the city's environmental practices.

    The city, however, discounts those concerns.

    Radke said the city believes the staff structural reviews of the affected buildings were unnecessary, since state law simply requires a registered engineer to review the plans.

    "The Las Vegas Building and Safety Department has reduced the number of structural reviews it conducts on certain projects, including but not limited to, patio covers, trash enclosures, fence walls and big box buildings," he said in a statement. Plans for the newly exempted projects, he added, "are already approved by Nevada registered engineers and the city was duplicating efforts by essentially having a city engineer review a project that another qualified engineer had already endorsed."

    The city will audit the structural plans periodically, to monitor compliance, he added.

    Structural plan reviews also will still be required on high-rise projects, "unusual jobs" -- such as the iconoclastic downtown building that renowned architect Frank Gehry has designed for the Lou Ruvo Brain Institute -- and "political jobs," meaning construction in which the city itself is the owner or a principal player, according to the same document.

    Las Vegas, however, is alone among large U.S. cities in its decision to not review structural plans for multi-story or large warehouse-style buildings, according to Ronald Hamburger, a San Francisco structural engineer with a national profile.

    "The common view among structural engineers in the (American) West is that competent plan checks by an appropriately qualified plan checker is absolutely necessary to protect the public safety," particularly in zones prone to earthquake, he said.

    Indianapolis, with a metropolitan population of approximately 1 million, has spent the past three years discarding a system that relied on private architects and engineers to verify that their building designs complied with safety codes.

    It decided to drop that system to reduce the threat of higher property insurance rates, which are partly based on the risk posed by buildings that go up without an independent check of the design's safety, said Rick Powers, the top building official for Indianapolis' combined city-county government.

    Jim Wadhams, a Las Vegas lobbyist for the insurance industry, doesn't believe Las Vegas' new procedures will lead to higher insurance rates here, though.

    Wadhams agrees that the city's structural reviews were duplicating other safety checks, and thinks other government agencies should follow the lead of Las Vegas.

    Other local entities don't appear ready to follow the city's example though.

    One official at the city of Henderson's Building and Fire Safety Department disagrees with Las Vegas' decision, arguing that it is important to have city engineers review structural plans.

    "As part of our internal building code, we have certain provisions we have to enforce," said Majid Pakniat, the manager of plans examination for Henderson. "Just because it is designed outside by an architect or engineer isn't enough."

    Ron Lynn, the director of development services for the county, said he would not consider relying entirely on the discretion of the builders' engineers and architects for structures of that size and importance.

    "When we review it, we are hoping to catch crucial components they missed," he said.

    Structural reviewers look for the type of load a building can withstand. Buildings need to be designed to withstand earthquakes, winds, floods and the forces of gravity well enough for inhabitants to be able to evacuate safely, even when the building is damaged beyond repair, he said.

    "Even if 15 percent of the structures are unsafe, I can't have that," Lynn said. "What if there was an earthquake?"

    Records of past structural plan reviews show that errors crop up even for building types that are now exempt from the reviews.

    In early 2004, for example, a Wal-Mart Neighborhood market at 10440 W. Cheyenne Blvd., underwent at least five structural reviews before passage.

    The city might have been better off looking at alternatives to dropping those types of structural reviews altogether, some said.

    "If I didn't have the staff, I'd outsource," Lynn said.

    The change has found support from some involving in the building industry.

    Developer John McHale of McHale Consulting said he saw "very little downside" to the revamped Las Vegas process. "Everybody realizes, if there's a 'push' by business owners or builders to do it cheaper, there's always 'push back' from the structural engineers and architects to keep safety margins intact."

    Contact reporter Valerie Miller at vmiller@ lvbusinesspress.com or 702-387-5286, and reporter Joan Whitely at jwhitely@review journal.com or 702-383-0268.



    Leave Your Comment 16 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Concerned Citizen wrote on May 05, 2008 04:11 PM: City of Las Vegas explained that they just rely on the integrity of the structural engineers who prepared the structural plans and calculations.

    In fact is, in most large structural engineering firms, small projects such as residentials, Walmart, and low rise buildings, are jusr being designed by their young unlicensed engineers and the senior engineers just stamped them without thoroughly reviewing them.

    I've worked with structural engineering firms and this is how it is in most cases.

    City of Las Vegas should rather explain that they're just relying on unlicensed engineers on the structural integrity of the buildings and on the structural safety of its residents, that is why structural plan check reviews are no longer required.


    Anonymous Structural Plan Checker wrote on May 05, 2008 03:06 PM: I feel sorry to the residents of the City of Las Vegas.

    Building permit fee typically allots plan check fee and 50% goes to structural plan check review fee.

    Since structural plan review had been eliminated, the applicants are still paying for the structural plan check review even though no structural review is to be made.

    As a structural plan checker from California, I have not reviewed and approved building plans without sending correction letters. There are critical items that need to be consider in structural plan check review such as:

    1. applying the applicable loads which sometimes overlook by the designer, for example, applying 40 psf live loads for a storage floor wherein building code requires minimum of 125 psf;

    2. specifying on drawings small structural member size such as beams, columns while calculations show bigger size requirements;

    3. incorrect drawing details; etc.

    These are just some of the major factors being overlooked on structural plan check review.

    Usually, 2 or 3 correction letters are sent before approval of the structural part of the building permit.

    This decision to scrap structural plan check review might have been proposed by a Building Official without knowledge of structural but only on non-structural disciplines.

    When the big quake comes, let's see which jurisdiction in Southern Nevada will have the greatest damage.

    From Anonymous Structural Plan Checker of California




    Ironic wrote on May 05, 2008 11:55 AM: The City should justify why are only structural reviews being eliminated and not the other construction trades. As I understand it, other reviews/inspections are still being performed. Why are they still reviewing architectural, electrical, mechancial, plumbing, fire protection, civil, etc.? Are these more important to life safety?

    Personally I would rather have an electrical outlet in the wrong place than a structural beam in my house. Why was only structural inspections eliminated?

    In addition, as the City is justifying, the other trades have licensed professional architects and engineers review those plans before they are submitted. According to their justification they are also unnecesarily being reviewed.

    Hence if budget is a concern, please eliminate all plans review as well. And while we are at it, licensed contractors build these projects, that should be enough that we take their word that they built them to the archiects/engineers plans and building codes. Hence why do we need building inspectors?

    It makes you wonder...


    Fred Frazzetta wrote on May 05, 2008 08:51 AM: Alan:

    Thanks for the support, it is much appreciated. I believe that there are more people like Gary W. & me out there, and I strongly encourage them to come forward. If, you are afraid to come forward for any reason, and I do mean any reason - you can contact me at:

    harrahswhistleblower@gmail.com

    I will be more than happy to help you or get you in touch with someone who can. We can make a difference together, but we must unite for increased strength. It is time for a change - I say out with the "Good Old Boy Network". Accountability is a must from this point on...no exceptions.


    Alan wrote on May 04, 2008 06:48 PM: Fred & Gary, Right on. When ever you tell the TRUTH the idiots come out to disclaim you. Again Fred F. made some allegations and low and behold they were all true. Not a Gary fan hates the TRUTH and has allot of baggage himself just read his words. I hope their are more Fred F. & Gary W. out there.


    Cawdor wrote on May 04, 2008 07:24 AM: The whole premise was built was that the county/city was the sole authority on what was safe and not. Now we learn it;s not about safety it's about money. If it is to be about money then fine. Disolve the " Las Vegas Department of Building and Safety" and let the county do it . If the county can;t keep out then dissolve that and let the state do it. If the state can;t promise safety then we learn (in the end) that government cannot provide a service better then the free market. Allow private assessment companies to certify and allow litigation against these companies(with jail time added) proceed if a building fails. It will not cost the taxpayers money and will provide a better service then the city is doing now


    Fred Frazzetta wrote on May 04, 2008 06:47 AM: Not a Gary Fan:

    Do you realize how stupid you sound? Probably not, but let me remind you that all my allegations have been found to be true, and because of this Harrah's has had to spend tens of millions of dollars to repair the hazards that they left behind during their illegal remodels. It is not over yet either...and won't be until Kirk England, Tom Jenkin, Mike Nasby, Tom Adams, Mike Whitehead, Leon Vermillion, George Kirkwood, and Gary Loveman are held accountable for their willful actions and brought to justice. They not only broke the law, but they also put the Public at risk for years & years all for the sake of Harrah's bottom line. What they did is criminal in every sense of the word, but you being such a "good little sheep" will defend these criminals to the end making you no better than them. As I have said before: why not be a man and let people know who you are, which will definitely expose your reason for defending the true lowlifes that I mentioned above. If you ever find your balls, which is doubtful...I would love to know your name - so I can add you to the list above.

    Gary Wright, you did the right thing for the right reason...thank you for not having been afraid to stand up and be heard. You don't need to defend yourself - it will just be the morons that don't get it that will be your detractors...don't waste your breath. The rest of us appreciate what you did.

    The lack of accountability in this town, and the corruption is rampant state wide. Too many so called "public protectors" looking the other way doing one awesome job protecting the CASINOS & big business...Public Corruption at its' best Vegas style!


    Gary Wright wrote on May 03, 2008 09:55 PM: In response to -- Not a Gary Fan....--
    No one knows my work history in this town, how long I have been here, or what I did before I went to work for the City or why I went to work for the City. (I worked at the City for 10 1/2 yrs). That includes this person. The only thing I will say is that I have a clean employment record. Because any comments concerning what I did before I went to work for the City is not going to be based on facts, and is just an attempt to destroy my name and intentions, and the corruption going on in the City, I AM NOT going to answer any more comments posted here concerning myself. Did this person know that I had a radio show on KLAV for about 1 1/2 years? I think not!!


    Genius wrote on May 03, 2008 09:00 AM: Why not just eliminate duplicity altogether. We don't need no stinkin' Las Vegas "city" government structure. The Clark County government structure can just do this work.. perhaps we may even get some work out of the county? I say abolish the city entity, we don't need it.


    Not a Gary Fan.... wrote on May 03, 2008 08:57 AM: Gary Wright falls into the same category as Fred Frazetta. He's a whistleblower with very little information. If he had been a competent tradesperson in the Plumbing trades, he would not have joined the city in the first place. He has burned many bridges in this town before this issue (much like Fred), and he will probably continue to do the same. Both of these lowlifes need a class in integrity.


    Read All Comments