• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Architect / Engineer passes away in the middle of a project

jar546

jar546

Forum Coordinator
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
11,051
Location
Somewhere Too Hot & Humid
How does your jurisdiction handle this?

What if an RFI is needed which require drawing changes/revisions?

Do you make the permit holder find another engineer/architect to take over as RDP of record?
 
If an RFI is needed (or something approved by an engineer), then we ask the applicant to identify their new EoR, and have that engineer provide a letter that indicates the date and extent of their reprisal as the EoR. Most engineer's will provide a statement indicating they have reviewed the plans, make no warranty, identify scope of future involvement, and specify date starting. We file the letter and review RFI based upon the merits of the report.
 
[A] 107.3.4 Design Professional in Responsible Charge
Where it is required that documents be prepared by a registered design professional, the building official shall be authorized to require the owner or the owner's authorized agent to engage and designate on the building permit application a registered design professional who shall act as the registered design professional in responsible charge. If the circumstances require, the owner or the owner's authorized agent shall designate a substitute registered design professional in responsible charge who shall perform the duties required of the original registered design professional in responsible charge. The building official shall be notified in writing by the owner or the owner's authorized agent if the registered design professional in responsible charge is changed or is unable to continue to perform the duties.

The registered design professional in responsible charge shall be responsible for reviewing and coordinating submittal documents prepared by others, including phased and deferred submittal items, for compatibility with the design of the building.
 
As ClassicT pointed out, per the code, the owner, must provide an RDP if directed to do so by the BO. If the A/E was part of an A/E firm, the A/E firm would be the one to identify a substitution. If the A/E was a sole proprietor or was a principal of a firm that had no other registered professionals, then the owner would need to seek another A/E firm to assume the role of RDP.

If standard AIA contract documents are used, the owner is obligated under the General Conditions of the Contract for Construction to retain an architect lawfully licensed to practice in the jurisdiction where the project is located. This is necessary since the contractor is required to rely on the actions of the architect, such as responding to RFIs, approving submittals, reviewing pay applications, etc. If the owner terminates the architect for any reason, the owner must employ another architect that is acceptable to the contractor. Similar provisions are provided in documents published by the EJCDC and ConsensusDocs.
 
Slightly different but similar situation … i was doing a tenant finishout in Miami. We were really unhappy with the AoR. The day the permit was issued we terminated the AoR and engaged a new firm. Had to submit a city document (maybe it was county) and get the original AoR to sign off. Fortunately the MEP designers were used by both architects, so they carried over. New AoR had to re-stamp all the drawings. It was not an easy or quick process, but the original architect was so bad that we felt it was worth the trouble.
 
We would look at this the same was as if the owner fired their architect/engineer. You need one, you better find one before work continues...
 
There is no reason for the building department to be aware of an RFI unless the response requires a change to the construction documents. Even then all the jurisdiction needs to know is that changes to the construction documents are being proposed.

We need to recognize that the laws related to licensing design professionals are legally separate from the laws empowering the adoption of building codes. Thus, those adopting building regulations or enforcing the regulations do not have the authority to regulate the design professionals.

If changes are needed to the construction documents, they will need to be signed by a registered design professional, but I am not aware of anything that requires that the design professional be the original design professional signing the documents in the original construction documents.

Yes, there will be concerns about the liability of the new design professional, but these are not the concern of the building department.

As long as no changes are needed to the construction documents the work can continue without there being a new design professional identified.
 
Mark K said:
As long as no changes are needed to the construction documents the work can continue without there being a new design professional identified.
Click to expand...
If the inspector has a question for the architect or engineer it speeds things along if the inspector knows who to contact.
 
Mark K said:
There is no reason for the building department to be aware of an RFI unless the response requires a change to the construction documents. Even then all the jurisdiction needs to know is that changes to the construction documents are being proposed.
Click to expand...
Yes, thank you for pointing this out Captain Obvious. I am glad that you are still here grinding your axe with Building Departments. I am sure that your continued negative attitude more than likely reflects in your reputation and relationship with the Building Departments you are forced to work with.

Mark, you often provide excellent replies that are well thought out and helpful. The continued negativity towards Building Departments is getting a little old but then again, I believe it is possible that you like trolling here. Many people act out in ways that make them feel more in control of their lives when another part of their life, such as work-life is not so controllable.
 
Mark K said:
We need to recognize that the laws related to licensing design professionals are legally separate from the laws empowering the adoption of building codes. Thus, those adopting building regulations or enforcing the regulations do not have the authority to regulate the design professionals.
Click to expand...
Not sure I agree that what we do is "regulating" design professionals. We do regulate the design and construction process.

The same could be said that we cannot regulate contractors, just what they construct.
 
Jar,
I thought it was a legit question and the responses on what to do were informative. This issue is similar to when the DP is fired, replaced or company is bought out and the AHJ needs to know who's the dude to converse with.
 
Until recently, the only code-required involvement by an RDP on most projects was structural observations, so unless the design changes or a structural observation is required, there’s no issue.
Usually it’s the construction lenders who are more concerned, and they often require a "consent to assignment‘ to be executed by the DPORs prior to closing the loan.

I was asked to take over a county project where the AOR could not continue. Got in there and found multiple unresolved ADA issues requiring a design change. The building official treated my work like a second, concurrent remodel, with our own stamp covering those changes.
‘Just like any other conventional remodel, I’m not responsible for the original approved design, but I am responsible for how my remodel changes that original approved design.
 
2018 IBC
[A] 107.3.4 Design professional in responsible charge.
Where it is required that documents be prepared by a registered design professional, the building official shall be authorized to require the owner or the owner’s authorized agent to engage and designate on the building permit application a registered design professional who shall act as the registered design professional in responsible charge. If the circumstances require, the owner or the owner’s authorized agent shall designate a substitute registered design professional in responsible charge who shall perform the duties required of the original registered design professional in responsible charge. The building official shall be notified in writing by the owner or the owner’s authorized agent if the registered design professional in responsible charge is changed or is unable to continue to perform the duties.

The registered design professional in responsible charge shall be responsible for reviewing and coordinating submittal documents prepared by others, including phased and deferred submittal items, for compatibility with the design of the building.
 
Years ago, I was hired to finish a hotel project after the first architect passed away. It was a fairly simple process to pick up where the previous architect left off.
 
I would assume it would be similar to a TI in a building - the original architect (or other design professional) is liable for what was originally designed and constructed. The TI architect (or other design professional) would be liable for what they designed, as well as what they modified from the originally designed structure (such as adding a door or window).
 
tmurray said:
Not sure I agree that what we do is "regulating" design professionals. We do regulate the design and construction process.

The same could be said that we cannot regulate contractors, just what they construct.
Click to expand...
Yes you regulate what is constructed not the process. Does the completed building comply with the building code?

What are your options if the constructed building does not comply with the building code? You can withhold the certificate of occupancy and if it is bad enough you can start proceedings to demolish the building. The action is against the building, not against the designers or the contractor.

The owner could sell the non-compliant building and then the headache is the responsibility of the new owner not the original owner.
 
Mark K said:
Yes you regulate what is constructed not the process. Does the completed building comply with the building code?

What are your options if the constructed building does not comply with the building code? You can withhold the certificate of occupancy and if it is bad enough you can start proceedings to demolish the building. The action is against the building, not against the designers or the contractor.

The owner could sell the non-compliant building and then the headache is the responsibility of the new owner not the original owner.
Click to expand...
BTDT. The project where we changed architects … downtown miami highrise. They cleared 2 city blocks and erected two 40-ish floor residential buildings connected at several floors. We signed the ground floor retail lease while the building was still under construction and had to wait to start our TI work.

The developer sold the building when it was complete, and the property management company changed twice. A year after we opened for business the building still did not have a full CO because of the fire suppression system, they couldn’t get it fully operational. The building engineer was incompetent and managed to burn up the diesel backup pump during a test. Ruined the pump and the diesel motor, had to wait months for a replacement.
 
Mark K said:
Yes you regulate what is constructed not the process.
Click to expand...
Building Departments enforce the construction process as determined by state statutes and adopted local ordinances that are often amended or completely rewritten based on the administrative sections of the building code. State agencies provide the basic framework that local jurisdictions use and fill in the blanks, making changes based on the needs of the community. Maybe I am taking your statement out of context, however, based on your previous posts, I don't believe so. The entire permit process is detailed from initial application to certificate of occupancy and everything in between. The majority of the work that Building Departments do is the administrative process.

State law along with local ordinances adopted by the governing bodies of the municipalities dictate what portions of the process are enforced locally.

Here are some examples: SS=State Statute, LO=Local Ordinance
  • All contractors must register (free) with the municipality, even if licensed by the state. LO
  • No inspections can be performed until a copy of the recorded NOC (Notice of Commencement) is received by the AHJ. SS
  • Local authorities fine contractors, architects or engineers for material code violations. SS
  • All shoring and reshoring procedures, plans, and details be submitted to the enforcement agency for recordkeeping. SS
  • Minimum verbiage required on signed and sealed documents from architects and engineers enforced locally. SS
The process is regulated.
 
jar546 said:
Building Departments enforce the construction process as determined by state statutes and adopted local ordinances that are often amended or completely rewritten based on the administrative sections of the building code. State agencies provide the basic framework that local jurisdictions use and fill in the blanks, making changes based on the needs of the community. Maybe I am taking your statement out of context, however, based on your previous posts, I don't believe so. The entire permit process is detailed from initial application to certificate of occupancy and everything in between. The majority of the work that Building Departments do is the administrative process.

State law along with local ordinances adopted by the governing bodies of the municipalities dictate what portions of the process are enforced locally.

Here are some examples: SS=State Statute, LO=Local Ordinance
  • All contractors must register (free) with the municipality, even if licensed by the state. LO
  • No inspections can be performed until a copy of the recorded NOC (Notice of Commencement) is received by the AHJ. SS
  • Local authorities fine contractors, architects or engineers for material code violations. SS
  • All shoring and reshoring procedures, plans, and details be submitted to the enforcement agency for recordkeeping. SS
  • Minimum verbiage required on signed and sealed documents from architects and engineers enforced locally. SS
The process is regulated.
Click to expand...
I appreciate that state statutes will vary from state to state. I will admit to having a California bias.

California law is clear that local jurisdictions cannot regulate engineers, architects, or contractors. Whether the contractor, engineer, or architect screwed up is addressed in the Civil courts or by the state licensing boards. I do not believe building departments are qualified to determine legal fault and I do not believe they can provide the due process protections that the individuals have a right to. The position of the building department is stronger when the focus is on whether the completed project is in compliance.

I suspect that the understanding of the word process may vary. Yes, there is a regulatory/administrative process but there is also the process by which the Owner, his consultants and contractors use to complete the project. This internal process and means and methods of the work should not be the concern of the building department.

With regards to fining architects and engineer for code violations does this apply to "violations" identified as part of the permitting process or does this encourage a minimal review so that the local authorities can issue fines when they identify code violations during construction? Sounds like games could be played. In California if a code violation is identified during construction the Owner is responsible for resolving the problem, and who will pay for the work is not a concern of the building department. Sure, the Owner may ask one of the parties to cover the cost but that is not a concern of the building department.

Even in the context of the state statutes identified I do not see how the building department can direct the contractor or engineer to take an action. Sure, the contractor or the designer will likely promptly respond but this is because they believe it is in their best interest to resolve the problem promptly, not because the building official can order them.
 
Mark K said:
Even in the context of the state statutes identified I do not see how the building department can direct the contractor or engineer to take an action. Sure, the contractor or the designer will likely promptly respond but this is because they believe it is in their best interest to resolve the problem promptly, not because the building official can order them.
Click to expand...
It is not the BD's job to direct the contractor or engineer to take action unless a violation exists. The contractual relationship between the design professional, owner, and contractor is not regulated by the BD either. The relationship between the three has its own set of legal obligations that is also not the business of the BD. What the BD requires for compliance and how the trio gets there are two different things and the process used is not relevant, just the outcome.

Concerning the BD's state-authorized ability to fine design professionals and contractors. That is designed to curb "rubber stamping" where an engineer, for example, submits documentation that knowingly does not meet the code or signs off on an obvious deficiency. This happens all too often. The P.E., however, can choose to bypass the local enforcement board and go right to the state regulatory authority, but this comes at a much bigger risk than a local slap on the wrist. State authorities don't have the staffing to deal with all complaints which is why the statute allows enforcement at the local level for certain items.
 
Mark K said:
I do not see how the building department can direct the contractor or engineer to take an action
Click to expand...
Nearly every correction given has that result. If your contention is that we only interact with the owner that is responsible for the property because we are directing corrections to the property and not the contractor....well then I wish the contractors knew that so they wouldn't take it so personal.
 
jar546 said:
It is not the BD's job to direct the contractor or engineer to take action unless a violation exists. The contractual relationship between the design professional, owner, and contractor is not regulated by the BD either. The relationship between the three has its own set of legal obligations that is also not the business of the BD. What the BD requires for compliance and how the trio gets there are two different things and the process used is not relevant, just the outcome.

Concerning the BD's state-authorized ability to fine design professionals and contractors. That is designed to curb "rubber stamping" where an engineer, for example, submits documentation that knowingly does not meet the code or signs off on an obvious deficiency. This happens all too often. The P.E., however, can choose to bypass the local enforcement board and go right to the state regulatory authority, but this comes at a much bigger risk than a local slap on the wrist. State authorities don't have the staffing to deal with all complaints which is why the statute allows enforcement at the local level for certain items.
Click to expand...
Jeff, can you send me or post that statute?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top