Architect required by code, project too small for any architect I've spoken to

[Bobby Kolev]

Dear all in the know, I feel like I am being forced in to a very silly problem that MUST have a very simple solution that I just can't find.

Have a small 1-story commercial building in Dallas, zoned light commercial.

Potential tenant for a suite of 1100 sqft is a 10 or 15 members church and they like it.
City says all is good, but they can't have it because it has 1 restroom and code requires two.
it just so happens that the next suite has its restroom literally adjacent to this one and by means of opening a door in the wall between the two suites and placing some walls around the two restrooms can be very easily made into a common shared area accessible from both sides through dedicated doors.

City inspector said this would work however because the tenant is a church the core requires an architect to submit the plans.

Out of the 6 architects in Dallas I've spoken to none had the desire or time to work on something so small.
Licensed engineer is not allowed to do it - it must be an architect says a document I was given by the City that I probably don't need to quote.
I am not trying to work around it. I literally could not get a single architect to agree to make a plan for a 30 ft hallway joining 2 restrooms - they all had way bigger things on their plates.

So...here is my question...what is to stop me from applying for the work by myself for the sake of just creating common area with 2 restrooms for the two suites...and after getting approval and completing it, calling that (or another) church to use the space, which now has 2 restrooms and no need for construction and therefore no need for architect?

The best addressee of this question is my local City code inspector, of course. But something told me I'd be better off asking online first.

Thank you!

 

[Mr. Inspector]

I don't know TX codes but as a plan reviewer I would required architect plans for this.
I just passed one plan review without a architect because all they were building was a small counter.

 

[Bobby Kolev]

I don't know TX codes but as a plan reviewer I would required architect plans for this.
I just passed one plan review without a architect because all they were building was a small corner.

You mean you'd require architect when joining the restrooms into a common are regardless of the type of tenant?

 

[ICE]

Not to throw shade but fyi .... church membership grows, at least that's the usual objective. Once the number hits fifty there shall be two exits and exit access doorways shall be separated by a horizontal distance equal to one-half the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the room.. The room can accommodate more than fifty occupants but the egress system has to match.

The maximum occupant load must be posted as well.

 

[mtlogcabin]

1st: Show me where an architect is required by law or ordinance

2nd: If an architect is not required then it is up to the AHJ as to what they need for a drawing for the file and the inspector to look at to assure code compliance is met.

3rd: As Ice mentioned there needs to be two exits out of the space right now because the Occupant Load exceeds 49 based on the sq footage of the space.

I would have no problem sending one of my inspectors out do the a "onsite plan review" and inform you what is required (maybe a design professional) for the intended use and what we need to be on the drawings that you would provide.

We are not the DMV and therefore we strive to provide customer services to help you through the permitting process so that your project will be safe and code compliant when finished.

Five Tips for Customer Service in the Public Sector

Learn the importance of Public Sector Customer Service and Five Tips to Improve Your customer service in government.

lauriebrown.com

[A] 107.1 General.
Submittal documents consisting of construction documents, statement of special inspections, geotechnical report and other data shall be submitted in two or more sets with each permit application. The construction documents shall be prepared by a registered design professional where required by the statutes of the jurisdiction in which the project is to be constructed. Where special conditions exist, the building official is authorized to require additional construction documents to be prepared by a registered design professional.

Exception: The building official is authorized to waive the submission of construction documents and other data not required to be prepared by a registered design professional if it is found that the nature of the work applied for is such that review of construction documents is not necessary to obtain compliance with this code.

 

[Bobby Kolev]

Not to throw shade but .... church membership grows, at least that's the usual objective. Once the number hits fifty there shall be two exits and exit access doorways shall be separated by a horizontal distance equal to one-half the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the room.. The room can accommodate more than fifty occupants but the egress system has to match.

The maximum occupant load must be posted as well.

1st: Show me where an architect is required by law or ordinance

Could not find a way to attach a file, so here is a link:

https://www.coppelltvrepair.com/data/temp/ArchRequiredFlowChart.pdf

This is what the city inspector referred me to.

I thought

START->Public Building (NO, not owned by state agency, a political subdivision of State etc.) ->

-> Institutional residential facility (NO, not residential in any way) ->

-> Private single-family dwelling, duplex, farm, ranch, agricultural building

or warehouse with limited public access? (NO, to all of those) ->

-> Multi-family (apartments or condominiums)? (NO, again not residential in any way) ->

-> Commercial building?*** (YES, enclosed structure primarily used for the purchase, sale, or exchange of commodities or services) ->

-> More than 2 stories? (NO, single story building) ->

-> More than 20,000 square feet? (NO, 7070 sqft) -> EXEMPT

However he told me that

"A church is not defined as a Commercial Building. When you get to that step the answer (By State law definition) is NO; which means you will need to Engage a Registered Architect or Approved Engineer."

After reading carefully the definition for "Commercial building" in the picture I have to agree I can't call his logic wrong.

However I still wonder what would happen if I apply for a permit that does the exact same work WITHOUT specifying a tenant and then, once done, a church applies for the space.

 

[Bobby Kolev]

To clarify: this is 1100 sqft suite in a 7070 sqft building.

The reason I thought the answer to "Commercial building" was "YES" was because the building itself is, well, commercial.

However if you look at the 1100 sqft that the church wants to occupy as a "enclosed structure...." as defined in the flowchart then I have to agree it doesn't meet the criteria since it isn't "...used for the purchase, sale, or exchange of commodities or services.".

Whether this is right or wrong interpretation of the requirement is not up for me to decide so I am not trying...it is a possible one and the power above me says it is correct, so I am not even questioning it anymore.

 

[Sifu]

I would require an architect, based on AHJ requirements, but even if not required by the AHJ, a really solid code analysis is still needed, which typically can only be provided by an architect. I would start at all of the base building data, such as construction type, mixed use strategy, means of egress, fire protection, required separations, fixture count, etc. Trades also come into play with energy, ventilation, lighting, controls etc. What may seem simple is often not if the building wasn't designed for the proposed uses.

 

[Bobby Kolev]

I would require an architect, based on AHJ requirements, but even if not required by the AHJ, a really solid code analysis is still needed, which typically can only be provided by an architect. I would start at all of the base building data, such as construction type, mixed use strategy, means of egress, fire protection, required separations, fixture count, etc. Trades also come into play with energy, ventilation, lighting, controls etc. What may seem simple is often not if the building wasn't designed for the proposed uses.

I appreciate the input, but it doesn't answer the question.

Would you require an architect if this was not for a church? (My take: no, you shouldn't, because then the space would classify as "commercial").

And would you require an architect if it was already done? (My take: I don't really know, but if it meets the criteria already then why involve an architect?!)

 

[my250r11]

Here state law rules over when a DP is required. Less than 10 no stamp just drawings. 10 - 49 Arch. or Engineer. 50+ requires multiple stamps. So I would see what state law is also. Here the local can adopt more restrictive requirements only.

 

[Sifu]

I can only answer based on my experience and practice, what your AHJ requires is up to them. They may have different thresholds for requiring a design professional than I do. But as stated, whether there is a design professional or not, the exact same questions need to be asked and answered. Not requiring a design professional, or even a general contractor is not an excuse to not follow the requirements of the adopted code.

"Commercial" isn't a codified use, not even defined in the IBC. It is a general term that means not "residential". Buried within the term commercial are the classified occupancies. Yes, in most cases I would require a design professional as per the AHJ requirement (I can waive the requirement for minor work, but based on what I know I would not waive it here), for the reasons I already mentioned, which were not specific to a church. For sure, a church carries with it more stringent requirements as an assembly occupancy, but all the building data issues still apply. This is an existing building, so it should be designed out of the existing building code if adopted, but is it a change of occupancy? Probably, which carries additional requirements. How about accessibility? Electrical, plumbing and mechanical? Lots of questions to be answered.

Your proposal is actually changes to two spaces, creating a third common area. This also raises the bar.

I just took a call a few minutes ago. It started as a new S-1 tenant in an existing light industrial building, that morphed into what would actually be an assembly occupancy in an existing building that was not designed to house it. That question started off like yours, about bathrooms, but there was a lot more to it. I told them what I am saying to you. Start with the design professional, if a code analysis reveals it can be done, they will provide it. If they don't require a design professional, then you should be able to provide the exact same data.

 

[jar546]

1st: Show me where an architect is required by law or ordinance

Most architect and engineer licensing laws require this and it is then implemented into the state or local building code. In Florida, it is a state statute within the licensing of design professionals and in most other states that I am aware of. The administrative section of the building code is not the complete rule of law. The generic statement in your copy and paste from the code is generic for a reason. Most states cover this anyway so the local jurisdiction does not have to.

 

[Bobby Kolev]

...Start with the design professional, if a code analysis reveals it can be done, they will provide it. If they don't require a design professional, then you should be able to provide the exact same data.

Thank you for taking the time.
I am sure there is a value in that recommendation.
As an engineer and service provider myself I do understand the risk with approaching everything as small and simple.

Now if I could only find an architect that wouldn't tell me this is too small for them...maybe the recession hits.

 

[jar546]

Out of the 6 architects in Dallas I've spoken to none had the desire or time to work on something so small.

There is always out there willing to do the job. Keep checking and don't use that as an excuse to circumvent the requirement if you did not exhaust all resources.

 

[Paul Sweet]

Look for a small (one or two person) office. They might not be booked as far ahead, and might know of somebody who just had a job fall through.

 

[Bobby Kolev]

There is always out there willing to do the job. Keep checking and don't use that as an excuse to circumvent the requirement if you did not exhaust all resources.

If no rules are broken I don't think it is right to call it circumventing the rules.

If different order of execution (as long as it is legal) leads to different outcome then I think the problem is in the rules, not their application.

Similarly I do not think there is a common sense in doing the same thing hoping for a different outcome.

Probably this is also where my frustration comes from. Like I said a few years ago they allowed me to split 3000 sqft into two and to be code compliant I had to install a restroom into one of them. This meant electrical on both sides, plumbing and foundation on one side, HVAC on both and of course fire sprinklers on both.
All that was done based on a simple design sketch rendered with the application.

This is incomparably smaller both in terms of scope and size and yet appears to require heavy guns (who don't care for it for the very same reason).

 

[SCBO1]

You might want to check with your states Board of Architects & Engineers, they may have something on a website or a pamphlet on when plans have to met the requirement of a design professional. If your putting in a bathroom here, it will need to be designed with ADA requirements. As ICE noted, the OL will most likey increase requiring that second bathroom, maybe a water fountain, maybe a mop sink, exit signage, posted OL, emergency lighting, GFCI for the cattle trough and water heater used as a baptismal.

Been there done that.

The coat closet later became a nursery, never saw that one coming.

Its really never as easy as it's made out to be, is it? You would think people would be up front with you on stuff.

 

[Sifu]

Some state statutes also allow licensed interior designers to provide this information rather than an architect or engineer, within certain parameters. I have encountered a few that did a great job.

 

[Mark K]

There is a little confusion. Does the state laws require an Architect or is it a local requirement. If it is a local requirement, I would suggest that the state has preempted this and that the local requirement is null and void.

 

[jar546]

There is a little confusion. Does the state laws require an Architect or is it a local requirement. If it is a local requirement, I would suggest that the state has preempted this and that the local requirement is null and void.

I'll take the troll bait Mark. There is this thing called 'home rule' which exists in Texas and many other states such as Florida. Even without it, almost every single state allows local municipalities to enact ordinances that are stricter than state statutes. In some cases, the ordinances must be reviewed by the appropriate state agency for approval, but not in all cases. Local ordinances that are properly adopted can bring the same level of requirements as state law. The state you call home, California has both Home Rule and Dillon's Rule, so I would suspect that you, as a licensed P.E. would be familiar with basic government law. If not, then maybe design professionals in California should be required to pass a separate test on how government works so they can raise to the level of competency as Building Officials.

 

[Sifu]

IBC dictates "where required by the statutes of the jurisdiction", not state law. The state law I refer to is the architects professions act, which has an exemption for interior designers in limited circumstances. So they work together, IBC says local AHJ makes the determination, and if the determination is to provide sealed documents, the professions act says who can seal it.

This from a helpful document in my state published by the state regulatory agency:

 

[mtlogcabin]

Most architect and engineer licensing laws require this and it is then implemented into the state or local building code. In Florida, it is a state statute within the licensing of design professionals and in most other states that I am aware of. The administrative section of the building code is not the complete rule of law. The generic statement in your copy and paste from the code is generic for a reason. Most states cover this anyway so the local jurisdiction does not have to.

You are correct and most including Florida have limited exemptions for requiring an architect or engineer

(b) This part, chapter 471, chapter 481, or any other provision of law does not:
1. Prevent any licensed engineer or architect from contracting directly with a licensed contractor for the preparation of plans, specifications, or a master design manual addressing structural designs used to make an application for building permits.
2. Require a licensed engineer or architect, when preparing drawings, specifications, plans, or master design manuals for use by any licensed contractor, to prepare site-specific drawings, specifications, or plans for the design and construction of single-family and two-family dwellings; swimming pools, spas, or screened enclosures; or any other structure not exceeding 1,200 square feet or one story in height. For the purpose of issuing building permits, local building officials shall accept such drawings, specifications, or plans when submitted by any licensed contractor. Upon good cause shown, local government code enforcement agencies may accept or reject plans prepared by persons licensed under chapter 471, chapter 481, or this chapter.

If I remember correctly you did not need an engineer for HVAC based on the size of the system, Electrical based on the amps/size of service and plumbing based on the number of fixtures.

There is always out there willing to do the job. Keep checking and don't use that as an excuse to circumvent the requirement if you did not exhaust all resources.

Speaking from experience. Check the local bars. Maybe if you offer to pay their bar tab they will put something together for you.

 

[Mark K]

I am knowledgeable regarding home rule and Dillion's rule as well as some applicable state and federal laws. I have also read the ICC publication "Legal Aspects of Code Administration" which I understand the building official certification exam is based on. I suspect I may be as informed as many building officials.

In California the case law is clear that the Legislature has preempted the licensing of engineers. This means that home rule is not applicable. Further this is reflected in statute (Business and Professions Code Section 460) and would thus apply to the regulation of Architecture.

Even in those states that promote the concept of home rule there are limitations. I refer you to "Community Communications Co. v. Boulder, 455 US 40 - Supreme Court 1982" which clearly said that when it comes to antitrust issues the concept of home rule does not apply. Note that regulating the practice of engineering and architecture is an act restraining trade. So, unless the Legislature, not a local jurisdiction, has clearly articulated a desire to restrain trade and created a mechanism to actively supervise the created monopoly local jurisdictions are limited in what they can do unless they wish to be subject to antitrust liability.

I suggest that building officials should be better informed about antitrust law, so they do not inadvertently expose their jurisdiction to antitrust liability.

 

[Msradell]

I think the entire idea of requiring an architect for the simple work is ridiculous. If I'm interpreting the OP's scope correctly the cost of the architect is going to be higher than the cost to do the work! As long as appropriate drawings are presented and approved I don't see any reason that architect is Req for this project! It seems like a case of the AHJ just throwing his authority around!