How do you interpret this?

[jar546]

What is your thought on the underlined section? How do you interpret the word "building?"

If you renovate for less than $25,000 on a commercial building, are you exempt?
OR
Is this intended to be for the design or renovation of buildings with a building value less thjan $25,000?

481.229 Exceptions; exemptions from licensure.—
(1) No person shall be required to qualify as an architect in order to make plans and specifications for, or supervise the erection, enlargement, or alteration of:
(a) Any building upon any farm for the use of any farmer, regardless of the cost of the building;
(b) Any one-family or two-family residence building, townhouse, or domestic outbuilding appurtenant to any one-family or two-family residence, regardless of cost; or
(c) Any other type of building costing less than $25,000, except a school, auditorium, or other building intended for public use, provided that the services of a registered architect shall not be required for minor school projects pursuant to s. 1013.45.

 

[classicT]

Interesting language... I presume that this is your state code regarding architects.

(c), per my read, indicates that an architect is exempt when the value of the entire building is less than $25k.

This reads pretty strong as it would pretty much mean all commercial except for a shed. It does not appear to differentiate between new construction and existing, which may lead to an interpretation that any modification requires a licensed architect when the building is worth more than $25k.

 

[mtlogcabin]

When I worked in Florida (early 90's) the $25,000.00 exemption was applied to the contract price of the work

 

[my250r11]

(c) Any other type of building costing less than $25,000, except a school, auditorium, or other building intended for public use, provided that the services of a registered architect shall not be required for minor school projects pursuant to s. 1013.45

The wording in red to me is saying that commercial is not an exception. Intend for public use covers pretty much all commercial.

 

[mark handler]

The wording in red to me is saying that commercial is not an exception. Intend for public use covers pretty much all commercial.

I agree

 

[jar546]

I agree

Agree agree

 

[steveray]

I would say the intent is the $25K project even though it is written poorly....And at least most commercial it would seem unless you have a definition of public?...

 

[jar546]

So what if you are renovating a dwelling unit within a high-rise condominium and the renovation is under $25,000. Would that be exempt from an RDP under your opinion?

 

[ADAguy]

Only if it were non-structural T.I./decorative work

 

[tmurray]

With no context, I would interpret it to mean the building, not the contract value. I would seek a written intent statement from the authority on this requirements.

Assuming the intention is the contract value, I would not require an RDP for interior renovations not impacting structural, fire, or life safety systems.