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

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.
Bobby, I think their requirements are for an architect OR engineer. Can you do it yourself?
 
Do what everyone else has done when faced with this situation, acquiesce or find a sympathetic politician.
 
Last edited:
I suggest that building officials should be better informed about antitrust law, so they do not inadvertently expose their jurisdiction to antitrust liability.
The good news for Building Officials is that many of us have either contract or staff attorneys who specialize in municipal law at our disposal to render legal opinions. It is easy for us to walk down the hall for a question or pick up the phone, and review a situation before we render our decision. Many municipalities have every single document reviewed by legal before it can be published on municipal websites. Much of what we do is already vetted by legal, whereas architects and engineers have limited access to those legal resources and rely on what they think based on a college class they took in 1972.

I will elude to a recent situation where a licensed P.E. refused to follow the rules of the Building Department when it came to digital signatures and the engineer cited his state association's training as the reasoning. In order for me to understand how this rogue, lone wolf engineer came to a conclusion that hundreds of his peers did not, I contacted his state association and spoke directly with their staff attorney who was bewildered as to how the engineer came to the conclusion he did. The association attorney agreed with our process. I suspect there are many other lone wolves out there such as the engineer in question who live in an alternative reality.
 
It seems like a case of the AHJ just throwing his authority around!
You can’t write codes and ordinances for every possible situation. AHJ has to apply the codes as written and interpreted. The applicant needs to follow the codes, or take advantage of the exception procedures.
 
Might I suggest reaching out to an architectural school to see if a work-placement/apprentice placement could do the work under the supervision of a qualified mentor?
 
You can’t write codes and ordinances for every possible situation. AHJ has to apply the codes as written and interpreted. The applicant needs to follow the codes, or take advantage of the exception procedures.
A key question is whether the codes have been properly adopted. This is too often an issue when the state has preempted the regulation of design professionals and building codes.

Agree that there are situations that the properly adopted laws do not cover. In these situations the decision what to do is between the design professional and his client, not the building official. Interpretations can only go so far.
 
In these situations the decision what to do is between the design professional and his client, not the building official.
Right. The BO makes a decision based on the codes. So saying the BO is throwing his authority around is not a fair statement.
 
So saying the BO is throwing his authority around is not a fair statement.
Far more common is a Building Official throwing his authority away.....that's not an issue that will show up at a forum.
 
Last edited:
The good news for Building Officials is that many of us have either contract or staff attorneys who specialize in municipal law at our disposal to render legal opinions. It is easy for us to walk down the hall for a question or pick up the phone, and review a situation before we render our decision. Many municipalities have every single document reviewed by legal before it can be published on municipal websites. Much of what we do is already vetted by legal, whereas architects and engineers have limited access to those legal resources and rely on what they think based on a college class they took in 1972.

I will elude to a recent situation where a licensed P.E. refused to follow the rules of the Building Department when it came to digital signatures and the engineer cited his state association's training as the reasoning. In order for me to understand how this rogue, lone wolf engineer came to a conclusion that hundreds of his peers did not, I contacted his state association and spoke directly with their staff attorney who was bewildered as to how the engineer came to the conclusion he did. The association attorney agreed with our process. I suspect there are many other lone wolves out there such as the engineer in question who live in an alternative reality.
While there may be "lone wolf" engineers it would be a breath of fresh air if there was recognition that there are rogue building officials. I remember a situation where the building official totally misrepresented a document during the meeting. It was clear that the fix was in and there was no justice.

A review by a city attorney will give the building official cover but my impression is that attorneys do not have familiarity with all of the state laws. This is especially the case with regards to the laws having to do with how building regulations are adopted and enforced.
 
The exception to the requiring a design professional is in the little print double **

* “Public Building” means any building that is owned by a State agency, a political subdivision of the State, or any other public entity in Texas.
** If a project involves only the alteration of an existing building and the alteration does not involve a substantial structural or exitway change to the building, the project is exempt from the architectural act
1664379000865.png
 

Attachments

  • 1664378915449.png
    1664378915449.png
    60.1 KB · Views: 1
it would be a breath of fresh air if there was recognition that there are rogue building officials
What causes you to fixate on this? You can’t seriously believe that we don’t know about rogue officilas….Hell’s Bells, we can name them.
 
Sounds to me like a change in use from a B/M to an A. That will require a RDP to stamp and sign. regardless of the restroom situation that will ultimately be addressed.
 
A good example here: Our state and our muni allow a residential or duplex structure be built with a set of plans be drawn on toilet paper if the building official feels theres enough information on the plans. I got my a$$ chewed cuz I asked for GFCI receptacles on a set of plans, the contractors were not placing enough receptacles around the kitchen counter tops prior to tile work. I was told that the plan drawer never had to do that before and they went over my head to nix it. The county here requires DP stamped plans and an affidivid to be signed by the builder that's pulling the permit and that they know how to build a house, go figure.
 
Is all of the 1100 sf for the worship area, or is some offices, storage, etc.? With 15 members is there a need for a 50+ occupant meeting room?
 
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.

In sake of fairness I have to disclose this turned out to be true.

More credit to you, sir!

The outcome is not clear, but thanks to this forum an architect did contact me and offered a price that was right within budget.
 
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!
Sounds like a Constitutional, freedom of Religion issue

First for any married couples because God sees them as ONE PERSON then the count needs to be adjusted accordingly

Then there is the Issue of a Higher Authority to address and finally

Are not the Codes written in a Prescriptive Manner to allow Contractors or others to simply submit a plan or Narrative and have a Plan Examiner review and approve said Plan?


Why the need for an Architect ?
 
Top