• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Frustrated

B

brat

Bronze Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
32
Location
North Idaho
How is it that we can have a sealed and signed submittal for an unlimited area ice skating facility that has been a year in the design stages and two sides of it don't even come close to 60' (or even 40') yard or public way? 44 items on the correction letter (nothing about typos or font size). How about this one: Part of the exit plan is to somehow get people from the bleachers over 17' of boards and netting, onto and across the ice to get to an exit? or how about this: We have adopted the 2006 I-codes; all of the structural calcs are referenced to the 2000 I-codes and 1999 ACI Standards, and the engineer says he doesn't have any means to update them and it doesn't matter anyway.

Now I have everyone breathing down my neck for throwing a giant blockade at the project and it's supposed to start snowing tommorrow. :o
 
Re: Frustrated

How did it get to the point of submittal without a preliminary conference to go over these things?
 
Re: Frustrated

First, does every correction item reference a code section?

Second, take it easy. You did your job and the designers did not. (or so it seems)

Most times if you did your job and didn't pull something out if your nether regions you should be OK
 
Re: Frustrated

Do your job.

Document everything.

Don't make it personal.

Don't criticize, just tell them what needs to be.

There are always multiple solutions, Exiting can be through tunnels rather than across the ice.
 
Re: Frustrated

brat said:
How is it that we can have a sealed and signed submittal for an unlimited area ice skating facility that has been a year in the design stages and two sides of it don't even come close to 60' (or even 40') yard or public way? 44 items on the correction letter (nothing about typos or font size). How about this one: Part of the exit plan is to somehow get people from the bleachers over 17' of boards and netting, onto and across the ice to get to an exit? or how about this: We have adopted the 2006 I-codes; all of the structural calcs are referenced to the 2000 I-codes and 1999 ACI Standards, and the engineer says he doesn't have any means to update them and it doesn't matter anyway.Now I have everyone breathing down my neck for throwing a giant blockade at the project and it's supposed to start snowing tommorrow. :o
Click to expand...
How can the engineer not update him. What he can't use internet and purchase a set of 2006 or even 2009 I-codes? For gawd sake, it can even be downloaded for free if the fellow looked around.

brat, if you know where it can be downloaded for free, just make him a disc with the PDFs (off the clock) or simply tell him where he can download it or view it online without charge.

That is what I find as ridiculous excuses. Send the engineer my email and I can get him up to date of the I-codes and ACI318.

email: rickbalkins(A)gmail.com
 
Re: Frustrated

The designers are 2,000 miles away and there was no pre-submittal conference. They are always welcomed but not required. My comments are supported by code reference. It isn't a general rant about all design professionals; I work with great design people daily. It's just frustrating in that this is a very visible, very political project that we all wanted to get going smoothly. I'm not taking or making it personal.

The last time I brought something like this to the attention of the State Board the final result was the surrendering of a license. I got heat over that so I won't be making that call again.
 
Re: Frustrated

brat said:
The designers are 2,000 miles away and there was no pre-submittal conference. They are always welcomed but not required. My comments are supported by code reference. It isn't a general rant about all design professionals; I work with great design people daily. It's just frustrating in that this is a very visible, very political project that we all wanted to get going smoothly. I'm not taking or making it personal. The last time I brought something like this to the attention of the State Board the final result was the surrendering of a license. I got heat over that so I won't be making that call again.
Click to expand...
surrendering of who's license?
 
Re: Frustrated

I like the front page of the website, scrolling in BIG RED LETTERS, "We await the arrival of our Permit..."

And the first FAQ:

Q: What is the status of the project?A: We submitted all necessary applications and materials to the Building and Planning Department for a Building Plan Review and the issuance of our Building Permit. It is hoped that the permit will be issued within 3 weeks.
Click to expand...
As far as working toward a solution, it seems like the allowable area may not be too far off Table 503. Group A-4, Type II-B, At=9,500. With 100% frontage of at least 30 feet, the total allowable area could be over 45,000 square feet. If they were trying to limit sprinkler protection for some reason, maybe they could utilize an Alternate Methods Request to apply Exception 2 of 507.3 while limiting the size per Section 506, including using the sprinkler increase of Section 506.3.

Only 43 more issues to go!
 
Re: Frustrated

mark handler said:
brat said:
An engineer.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Pull his/her license because he/she doesn’t meet the code?

It's not because he didn't meet code but because he wasn't meeting the professional standard of care.

Meeting codes and keeping up with the engineering standards of the day is part of the professional standard of care and duty of being a design professional. Then there is the persons design/engineering that is also reviewed. Not complying with code isn't the specific reason the license is pulled by the license boards. When cases like this occurs, it opens up an investigation and evaluation of the plans prepared is made and because the plans are reviewed by peers (members of the licensing board), the board probably found some striking problems in the plans. Working with outdated codes can result in some serious issue which puts the public health, safety and welfare at risk.
 
Re: Frustrated

Keep the, "the design and development team never bothered to come in for a pre-submission conference" in your back pocket...right up until the developer and the politicians are ready to BBQ you for not being a team player.
 
Re: Frustrated

mark handler said:
It's not because he didn't meet code but because he wasn't meeting the professional standard of care.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Not provable, he said, he said. Hearsay

License boards do not revoke/suspend license for just not complying with code. It has to be more deep seated then that and scoping to the entire practice and duty of care. There would be something that falls in that line for them to revoke. Given the similarity of this case with the previous scenario the O.P. of this thread referred to - the reason they pulled the license is based on negligence and non-compliance with performing engineering services to the professional standard of care which is to equal or surpass the minimum of code and failure to uphold the duty of care. Those are the grounds that architects and engineers loses their license when it involves code compliance / building officials.
 
Re: Frustrated

Don't let that stop you.

As a design professional, I would appreciate it if the "chaff" is removed. As difficult as it is to get licensed, it should be quality that continues - not some schlock job done to get into your resume.
 
Re: Frustrated

There were phone conversations with the design professionals before this submittal. All they were intersted in was the adopted codes and the relevant local design criteria. I always end those conversations with an invitation to contact me any time if there are further concerns or questions. I've already stated what codes the engineering calcs are based on. To add to that, on the title page of the architectural plans in big letters it declares compliance with the "2006 IBC As Adopted By The UBC". What the heck is that supposed to mean?

If being a team player means offering as much help and options as I can legally, then that's what I do; if it means being one of the good old boys, count me out. My job is to do my best to help make sure the occupants of that building as safe as the minimum provisions of the codes require. If that gets me fried then so be it.
 
Re: Frustrated

I wasn't implying that you weren't a team player, or that it was your fault that a pre-submittal meeting did not occur.

If it's a political hot potato, you can be sure there were meetings and conversations to which you were not invited.

I'd save pointing all that out until you're at the "what have you got to say for yourself?" moment should it come.
 
Re: Frustrated

brat - Based on your posts, YOU did YOUR job. The DPR did NOT do his. I feel your pain (more than you will ever know :( ) and can only restate the obvious...

Document everything! (for the record, the way I ended up in my current job was by NOT documenting everything at my first job! :o )

Every conversation regarding this project, no matter how trivial it seems at the time, will play out in the end. The better you have documented the process, the firmer the ground upon which you stand.

Be as cooperative as possible (check),

Be willing to offer alternatives (check),

Be willing to 'compromise' (no way Jose!).

Do not ignore the code for the convenience of one lazy DP.

Do not ignore your duty for one (or more) boisterous 'politician(s)'.

Remember, not all 'workplace harrassment' is of a sexual nature, any attemps to force you to ignore the code or your duty to the PEOPLE you serve should be well documented (there's that word again).

And for G-ds sake, keep a second copy of those 'documents' in a safe place, far away from the office! Good luck, local politics can be a rough ride. Payback can be a b!#(h, but revenge can be a M....... ........r (moderators are watching, shhhhh!).
 
Re: Frustrated

John Drobysh said:
brat - Based on your posts, YOU did YOUR job. The DPR did NOT do his. I feel your pain (more than you will ever know :( ) and can only restate the obvious... Document everything! (for the record, the way I ended up in my current job was by NOT documenting everything at my first job! :o )

Every conversation regarding this project, no matter how trivial it seems at the time, will play out in the end. The better you have documented the process, the firmer the ground upon which you stand.

Be as cooperative as possible (check),

Be willing to offer alternatives (check),

Be willing to 'compromise' (no way Jose!).

Do not ignore the code for the convenience of one lazy DP.

Do not ignore your duty for one (or more) boisterous 'politician(s)'.

Remember, not all 'workplace harrassment' is of a sexual nature, any attemps to force you to ignore the code or your duty to the PEOPLE you serve should be well documented (there's that word again).

And for G-ds sake, keep a second copy of those 'documents' in a safe place, far away from the office! Good luck, local politics can be a rough ride. Payback can be a b!#(h, but revenge can be a M....... ........r (moderators are watching, shhhhh!).
Click to expand...
As long as you're not calling another person AND you don't spell out the words, I'm not going to get all over people for it. This forum is mostly attended by adults so I'm not to nitpicky. Just refrain from making it a regular daily (or near daily like 2-6 times a week) habit. Certain words doesn't have to be a regularly used vocabulary where every other word is one of those such words.

Anyway, enjoy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top