JBI
Registered User
Re: Lateral Calculations for Freestanding Pole Buildings
It's GOOD to be HOME! :lol:
It's GOOD to be HOME! :lol:
-
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
Lateral Calculations for Freestanding Pole Buildings
- Thread starter rbrunk
- Start date
RickAstoria
-------------------
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2009
- Messages
- 531
Re: Lateral Calculations for Freestanding Pole Buildings
The building code generally do not use "design professional" except in definition. They use the words "registered design professional".
But for all legal matters beyond your little office - I am still the design professional of responsible charge over the preparation. The word professional is not limited to "licensed".
http://www.diydoctor.org.uk/projects/bu ... naryd5.htm
http://www.colorado.edu/engineering/civ ... ofessional
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional
Design professional
A term used generally to refer to architects; civil, structural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning engineers; interior designers; landscape architects; and others whose services have either traditionally been considered "professional" activities, require licensing or registration by the state, or otherwise require the knowledge and application of design principles appropriate to the problem at hand.
A Building Designer is required (in order to perform the work of building design) to and or possess the following:
1. Academic qualifications - A college level degree or self-study education or combination thereof that provides the knowledge of the mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences, Art, Drawing/Drafting and CAD skills and other architectural/building design subject matters including form, layout, ect.
2. Expert and specialised knowledge in field which one is practicing professionally.
3. Excellent manual/practical and literary skills in relation to profession.
4. High quality work in (examples): creations, products, services, presentations, consultancy, primary/other research, administrative, marketing or other work endeavours.
5. A high standard of professional ethics, behaviour and work activities while carrying out one's profession (as an employee, self-employed person, career, enterprise, business, company, or partnership/associate/colleague, etc). The professional owes a higher duty to a client, often a privilege of confidentiality, as well as a duty not to abandon the client just because he or she may not be able to pay or remunerate the professional. Often the professional is required to put the interest of the client ahead of his own interests. [ There is a point where reasonable efforts are exhausted and a client needs to be abandoned/dropped. ]
6. Reasonable work moral and motivation. Having interest and desire to do a job well as well as holding positive attitude towards the profession are important elements in attaining a high level of professionalism.
7. Is a individual who does not require supervision.
Most building designers that I know of possess all of these. A formal NAAB degree is not absolutely required but it is applicable. The most important thing is the person possess the knowledge and technical experience to competently design houses and other exempt buildings to any degree of level. Of course, professional ethics also would mandate that a person does not practice beyond ones level of competence.
Under various other Oregon laws, I would fall in the definitions of profession and my services relate to design. A design professional would be a professional of a design occupation.
In the end of the day, I'm the one that is responsible for the plans and any corrections have to be made by me. I'm the one that would be making corrections to the plans. Because the plans are not copyright ownership of the client. Because, I am not the client's employee. I also am still a design professional whether the building codes refer to me as such or not.
When it comes to permits and permit process, the person that you be dealing with is the Owner or Owner's Authorized Agent. The Construction Documents will contain the designer of responsible charge over the project. This is required regardless of license. ORS 671.025.
671.025 Certain plans to carry stamp; identification. (1) Any person applying for a license or permit required under the laws of this state or the ordinances of any jurisdiction in which the person proposes to erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, improve, remove or convert a building shall submit an original or reproduction of the plans and specifications for the work proposed. The plans and specifications shall bear the stamp of a registered architect, or of a registered professional engineer, where the services of a registered architect or of a registered professional engineer are required by the provisions of ORS 671.010 to 671.220, and shall be drawn to scale with sufficient clarity to indicate the nature and extent of the work proposed and that the work proposed conforms to ORS 671.010 to 671.220, State Building Code and to any other applicable laws and ordinances.
(2) The plans and specifications shall bear identification which shall include, but not be limited to:
(a) The project name and location;
(b) The name, address and telephone number of the person responsible for the preparation of the documents;
© The name, address and telephone number of the owner; and
(d) The date the documents were issued.
(3) Each jurisdiction which requires the issuance of a permit as a condition precedent to the construction, alteration, improvement or repair of any building or structure shall require the signature and registration stamp on the plans and specifications from a person allowed under the provisions of this section to prepare the plans and specifications.
(4) The registration stamp and signature on the plans and specifications of a person registered under this section to prepare the plans and specifications shall constitute compliance with this section.
(5) The provisions under this section shall not apply to the issuance of permits where the preparation of plans and specifications for the construction, alteration, improvement or repair of a building or structure is exempt from the provisions of this section except that the person preparing the plans and specifications for others shall be so identified. [1961 c.585 §3; 1977 c.803 §3; 1991 c.910 §1]
Subsection (5) requires that the preparer of the plans and specifications by me (since I am preparing the plans for others as referred to above) by identified. So it would be clear that the name, address and telephone number be identified. Most jurisdiction would still require the other information required by R106.1.1 (106.1.1)
R106.1.1 Information on construction documents. Construction documents shall be drawn upon suitable material.
Electronic media documents are permitted to be submitted when approved by the building official. Construction documents
shall be of sufficient clarity to indicate the location, nature and extent of the work proposed and show in detail
that it will conform to the provisions of this code and relevant laws, ordinances, rules and regulations, as determined by
the building official.
Simply put, I am part of the design/permitting process to the same extent as would an architect on exempt buildings. First, the contractor HAS nothing more involved in the permitting process of a design as I because the contractor is NO more a design professional as I am unless licensed as an architect or engineer. Secondly, I would technically be a contractor but not a construction contractor which can be made any time any moment I decide to deal with that. The contractor (construction) license is for construction not designing. We are talking Plan Review not construction inspection. When it comes to plan review, it is me that is involved on exempt buildings on plans prepared by me on exempt buildings. The contractor is not even involved in the design until bids are made. So it is me, the designer who is ultimately liable for design not the home owner or the contractor. Who has to make the changes to the plans? Me! In fact, architects don't have to supervise the construction of single-family residences. So, I'm involved because A) it is my name on the plans and it is required that the preparer of the documents is identified. B) I'm LIABLE for my design decisions and C) The plans are copyrighted to me which means by federal law, the plans may not be altered by anyone other than the copyright holder.kilitact said:Rick; as a non-professional designer, you would not be part of the permitting process, no debating that point, you’re not a design professional or contractor, so bottom line I wouldn’t have to explain anything to you. It appears that you’re trying to blow a lot of smoke to attempt to cover your non-professional status?Brudgers; the non-professionals in your jurisdiction must like your take. No justification for any design, lol.
As a plans examiner, it would take way too much time reviewing to ensure compliance without the calculations justifying the design.
The building code generally do not use "design professional" except in definition. They use the words "registered design professional".
But for all legal matters beyond your little office - I am still the design professional of responsible charge over the preparation. The word professional is not limited to "licensed".
http://www.diydoctor.org.uk/projects/bu ... naryd5.htm
http://www.colorado.edu/engineering/civ ... ofessional
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional
Design professional
A term used generally to refer to architects; civil, structural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning engineers; interior designers; landscape architects; and others whose services have either traditionally been considered "professional" activities, require licensing or registration by the state, or otherwise require the knowledge and application of design principles appropriate to the problem at hand.
A Building Designer is required (in order to perform the work of building design) to and or possess the following:
1. Academic qualifications - A college level degree or self-study education or combination thereof that provides the knowledge of the mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences, Art, Drawing/Drafting and CAD skills and other architectural/building design subject matters including form, layout, ect.
2. Expert and specialised knowledge in field which one is practicing professionally.
3. Excellent manual/practical and literary skills in relation to profession.
4. High quality work in (examples): creations, products, services, presentations, consultancy, primary/other research, administrative, marketing or other work endeavours.
5. A high standard of professional ethics, behaviour and work activities while carrying out one's profession (as an employee, self-employed person, career, enterprise, business, company, or partnership/associate/colleague, etc). The professional owes a higher duty to a client, often a privilege of confidentiality, as well as a duty not to abandon the client just because he or she may not be able to pay or remunerate the professional. Often the professional is required to put the interest of the client ahead of his own interests. [ There is a point where reasonable efforts are exhausted and a client needs to be abandoned/dropped. ]
6. Reasonable work moral and motivation. Having interest and desire to do a job well as well as holding positive attitude towards the profession are important elements in attaining a high level of professionalism.
7. Is a individual who does not require supervision.
Most building designers that I know of possess all of these. A formal NAAB degree is not absolutely required but it is applicable. The most important thing is the person possess the knowledge and technical experience to competently design houses and other exempt buildings to any degree of level. Of course, professional ethics also would mandate that a person does not practice beyond ones level of competence.
Under various other Oregon laws, I would fall in the definitions of profession and my services relate to design. A design professional would be a professional of a design occupation.
In the end of the day, I'm the one that is responsible for the plans and any corrections have to be made by me. I'm the one that would be making corrections to the plans. Because the plans are not copyright ownership of the client. Because, I am not the client's employee. I also am still a design professional whether the building codes refer to me as such or not.
When it comes to permits and permit process, the person that you be dealing with is the Owner or Owner's Authorized Agent. The Construction Documents will contain the designer of responsible charge over the project. This is required regardless of license. ORS 671.025.
671.025 Certain plans to carry stamp; identification. (1) Any person applying for a license or permit required under the laws of this state or the ordinances of any jurisdiction in which the person proposes to erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, improve, remove or convert a building shall submit an original or reproduction of the plans and specifications for the work proposed. The plans and specifications shall bear the stamp of a registered architect, or of a registered professional engineer, where the services of a registered architect or of a registered professional engineer are required by the provisions of ORS 671.010 to 671.220, and shall be drawn to scale with sufficient clarity to indicate the nature and extent of the work proposed and that the work proposed conforms to ORS 671.010 to 671.220, State Building Code and to any other applicable laws and ordinances.
(2) The plans and specifications shall bear identification which shall include, but not be limited to:
(a) The project name and location;
(b) The name, address and telephone number of the person responsible for the preparation of the documents;
© The name, address and telephone number of the owner; and
(d) The date the documents were issued.
(3) Each jurisdiction which requires the issuance of a permit as a condition precedent to the construction, alteration, improvement or repair of any building or structure shall require the signature and registration stamp on the plans and specifications from a person allowed under the provisions of this section to prepare the plans and specifications.
(4) The registration stamp and signature on the plans and specifications of a person registered under this section to prepare the plans and specifications shall constitute compliance with this section.
(5) The provisions under this section shall not apply to the issuance of permits where the preparation of plans and specifications for the construction, alteration, improvement or repair of a building or structure is exempt from the provisions of this section except that the person preparing the plans and specifications for others shall be so identified. [1961 c.585 §3; 1977 c.803 §3; 1991 c.910 §1]
Subsection (5) requires that the preparer of the plans and specifications by me (since I am preparing the plans for others as referred to above) by identified. So it would be clear that the name, address and telephone number be identified. Most jurisdiction would still require the other information required by R106.1.1 (106.1.1)
R106.1.1 Information on construction documents. Construction documents shall be drawn upon suitable material.
Electronic media documents are permitted to be submitted when approved by the building official. Construction documents
shall be of sufficient clarity to indicate the location, nature and extent of the work proposed and show in detail
that it will conform to the provisions of this code and relevant laws, ordinances, rules and regulations, as determined by
the building official.
RickAstoria
-------------------
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2009
- Messages
- 531
Re: Lateral Calculations for Freestanding Pole Buildings
Kilitact, we know....
True indeed. Now we get this diatribe onto this forum record. We all know we have fun. :lol:John Drobysh said:
Kilitact, we know....
mtlogcabin
SAWHORSE
Re: Lateral Calculations for Freestanding Pole Buildings
Rick and kilitact you two have been disagreeing on this subject for over a year now. Rick you started this exact discussion on another post that you are repeating here. Agree to disagree and grow up and quit acting like lawyer wantabe's. It's not the type of home I grew up in nor want to live in
Both of you have a lot of proffessional knowledge to share from your different backgrounds that all of us can learn from and your constant arguring over liscensing requirements detracts from the original post.
It is a commercial IBC structure and a pole building by its nature is out of the scope of 2308 for light frame construction. rbrunk will decide who can submit the design in accordance with HIS local or state laws.
Rick without designing it you could have been more helpful by giving advise to rbrunk on what to ask for from the designer for this structure
1. It is accessory to the fire department. (Should have posted this under commercial category)
2. It is approx. 480 square feet with 4, 6x8 posts located at each corner.
3. Two parking bays for fire department maintenance vehicles only.
4. Seismic zone D
5. Total height approx. 15'-16' to ridge of a 4/12 roof built from engineered trusses.
6. Clearance under beams from finish grade is 8'.
Rick and kilitact you two have been disagreeing on this subject for over a year now. Rick you started this exact discussion on another post that you are repeating here. Agree to disagree and grow up and quit acting like lawyer wantabe's. It's not the type of home I grew up in nor want to live in
Both of you have a lot of proffessional knowledge to share from your different backgrounds that all of us can learn from and your constant arguring over liscensing requirements detracts from the original post.
It is a commercial IBC structure and a pole building by its nature is out of the scope of 2308 for light frame construction. rbrunk will decide who can submit the design in accordance with HIS local or state laws.
Rick without designing it you could have been more helpful by giving advise to rbrunk on what to ask for from the designer for this structure
1. It is accessory to the fire department. (Should have posted this under commercial category)
2. It is approx. 480 square feet with 4, 6x8 posts located at each corner.
3. Two parking bays for fire department maintenance vehicles only.
4. Seismic zone D
5. Total height approx. 15'-16' to ridge of a 4/12 roof built from engineered trusses.
6. Clearance under beams from finish grade is 8'.
RickAstoria
-------------------
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2009
- Messages
- 531
Re: Lateral Calculations for Freestanding Pole Buildings
From the information given here:
First question, would be is this accessory attached or detached. If attached, what is the combined sq.ft. of the fire-department and the accessory and all usable areas under (that includes walk-ways - generally areas of 3x3 and larger would be usable area) roof projection and common roof.
This would have an 8' clearance from finished grade (or slab) to bottom of trusses?
What I would expect to see in seismic zones like here in Astoria, Oregon, I would expect to see lateral force resistance. This can be achieved a number of ways but I would expect the designer to prepare drawings, calcs and graphical diagrams showing how the systems and bracing systems will be able to resist lateral forces and the size, type and details and specs on how these systems are connected at all the posts, beams, trusses and bracing. I might expect to see some sort of continuous grade beam footing system under the posts with piles/caisson or a deep footing pad to help secure foundation and this continuous system would help. I would expect to possible see some form of hold-down mechanism tied into the 6x8 posts to a continuous foundation/footing system.
I would ask questions regarding these systems being applied to this structure. If it were me, I would use some diagonal bracing and strong fastening system to lock in the posts. Using a Tendon & Mortise connection joint and pin dowels and brackets and nails. Or something in this ballpark. There may also be an in-fill 2x6 stud-frame shearwall used with 1/2 to 3/4" plywood sheathing.
The intricacies of this would determined by the designer in charge. Which code speaks of pole-buildings would be interesting.
This would be Type IV construction Occupancy/Use Group S or U building.
The code provisions for Type IV would be a good start on the requirements.
Ok. I haven't read all rbrunk's posts.mtlogcabin said:
From the information given here:
First question, would be is this accessory attached or detached. If attached, what is the combined sq.ft. of the fire-department and the accessory and all usable areas under (that includes walk-ways - generally areas of 3x3 and larger would be usable area) roof projection and common roof.
This would have an 8' clearance from finished grade (or slab) to bottom of trusses?
What I would expect to see in seismic zones like here in Astoria, Oregon, I would expect to see lateral force resistance. This can be achieved a number of ways but I would expect the designer to prepare drawings, calcs and graphical diagrams showing how the systems and bracing systems will be able to resist lateral forces and the size, type and details and specs on how these systems are connected at all the posts, beams, trusses and bracing. I might expect to see some sort of continuous grade beam footing system under the posts with piles/caisson or a deep footing pad to help secure foundation and this continuous system would help. I would expect to possible see some form of hold-down mechanism tied into the 6x8 posts to a continuous foundation/footing system.
I would ask questions regarding these systems being applied to this structure. If it were me, I would use some diagonal bracing and strong fastening system to lock in the posts. Using a Tendon & Mortise connection joint and pin dowels and brackets and nails. Or something in this ballpark. There may also be an in-fill 2x6 stud-frame shearwall used with 1/2 to 3/4" plywood sheathing.
The intricacies of this would determined by the designer in charge. Which code speaks of pole-buildings would be interesting.
This would be Type IV construction Occupancy/Use Group S or U building.
The code provisions for Type IV would be a good start on the requirements.
Re: Lateral Calculations for Freestanding Pole Buildings
When I did, I didn't ask for calculations as a CYA method.
If I got calcs from a design professional, I reviewed them.
When I just got a seal, I spot checked areas of concern by running my own calcs.
The adequacy of the design was typically a function of the quality of the individual, not their particular license.
As I said the math is objective.
Many people in the construction industry can adequately design common building components for a simple structure using basic engineering principles and calculations.
How long it takes you to evaluate it is beside the point.
The point of the code is safety, not plans examiner productivity.
An exempt building is exempt.
These days, I don't have a jurisdiction in the sense that your response appears to assume.kilitact said:Brudgers; the non-professionals in your jurisdiction must like your take. No justification for any design, lol.As a plans examiner, it would take way too much time reviewing to ensure compliance without the calculations justifying the design.
When I did, I didn't ask for calculations as a CYA method.
If I got calcs from a design professional, I reviewed them.
When I just got a seal, I spot checked areas of concern by running my own calcs.
The adequacy of the design was typically a function of the quality of the individual, not their particular license.
As I said the math is objective.
Many people in the construction industry can adequately design common building components for a simple structure using basic engineering principles and calculations.
How long it takes you to evaluate it is beside the point.
The point of the code is safety, not plans examiner productivity.
An exempt building is exempt.
RickAstoria
-------------------
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2009
- Messages
- 531
Re: Lateral Calculations for Freestanding Pole Buildings
When I did, I didn't ask for calculations as a CYA method.
If I got calcs from a design professional, I reviewed them.
When I just got a seal, I spot checked areas of concern by running my own calcs.
The adequacy of the design was typically a function of the quality of the individual, not their particular license.
As I said the math is objective.
Many people in the construction industry can adequately design common building components for a simple structure using basic engineering principles and calculations.
How long it takes you to evaluate it is beside the point.
The point of the code is safety, not plans examiner productivity.
An exempt building is exempt.
Like Brudgers said, exempt means exempt. I do and would support Kilitact requiring an individual (licensed or not) to get a registered design professional that is competent to prepare the plans correctly IF the person attempted to prepare such plans and failed and failed to make corrections. 2-3 attempts is reasonable. 3 strikes - your out. First attempt is the initial submissions. You can always deny the plans as failing to comply until its correct. Besides, your office is getting richer. :lol:
I think a 3 strikes policy would be acceptable for a particular project in most cases. The number of attempts can be adjusted based on complexity of project but I think for most projects 5 attempts on certain drawings would be the limit. In a deferred submission, these number of attempts would be based on each submitted portions. So, if it is submitted in 3 portions then 3 attempts per portion would be reasonable on complex projects.
Of course, non-exempt projects MUST bear the stamps of an RDP.
In the end, you are safeguarding the public health, safety and welfare by not approving plans until properly designed and by reviewing the plans for calculations to be correct. Calcs maybe reviewed by the city/county engineer and based on engineer's review the plans maybe approved or denied. If calcs and everything else on the submitted documents are done correctly and stamp seal is not required by statutes then approve the plans.
These days, I don't have a jurisdiction in the sense that your response appears to assume.brudgers said:kilitact said:Brudgers; the non-professionals in your jurisdiction must like your take. No justification for any design, lol.As a plans examiner, it would take way too much time reviewing to ensure compliance without the calculations justifying the design.
When I did, I didn't ask for calculations as a CYA method.
If I got calcs from a design professional, I reviewed them.
When I just got a seal, I spot checked areas of concern by running my own calcs.
The adequacy of the design was typically a function of the quality of the individual, not their particular license.
As I said the math is objective.
Many people in the construction industry can adequately design common building components for a simple structure using basic engineering principles and calculations.
How long it takes you to evaluate it is beside the point.
The point of the code is safety, not plans examiner productivity.
An exempt building is exempt.
Like Brudgers said, exempt means exempt. I do and would support Kilitact requiring an individual (licensed or not) to get a registered design professional that is competent to prepare the plans correctly IF the person attempted to prepare such plans and failed and failed to make corrections. 2-3 attempts is reasonable. 3 strikes - your out. First attempt is the initial submissions. You can always deny the plans as failing to comply until its correct. Besides, your office is getting richer. :lol:
I think a 3 strikes policy would be acceptable for a particular project in most cases. The number of attempts can be adjusted based on complexity of project but I think for most projects 5 attempts on certain drawings would be the limit. In a deferred submission, these number of attempts would be based on each submitted portions. So, if it is submitted in 3 portions then 3 attempts per portion would be reasonable on complex projects.
Of course, non-exempt projects MUST bear the stamps of an RDP.
In the end, you are safeguarding the public health, safety and welfare by not approving plans until properly designed and by reviewing the plans for calculations to be correct. Calcs maybe reviewed by the city/county engineer and based on engineer's review the plans maybe approved or denied. If calcs and everything else on the submitted documents are done correctly and stamp seal is not required by statutes then approve the plans.
Re: Lateral Calculations for Freestanding Pole Buildings
brudgers wrote
brudgers wrote
I require calculations to justify the design, thats a given, on exempt or non-exempt buildings, all engineered calculations will be stamped and sealed. I don't base my review on the quality of the individual nor do I spot check calculations. When I complete my plan review and sign my name on the plans, I will be assured that I've reviewed the complete submittal for code complaince, not just spot checked, thats my CYA.
Re: Lateral Calculations for Freestanding Pole Buildings
Or do you just check a box on a form?
Wow, you have time to run complete calcs?kilitact said:I require calculations to justify the design, thats a given, on exempt or non-exempt buildings, all engineered calculations will be stamped and sealed. I don't base my review on the quality of the individual nor do I spot check calculations. When I complete my plan review and sign my name on the plans, I will be assured that I've reviewed the complete submittal for code complaince, not just spot checked, thats my CYA.
Or do you just check a box on a form?
Re: Lateral Calculations for Freestanding Pole Buildings
First I check my plans.
Then I sign them.
Then I seal them.
Then I enjoy personal liability until repose.
Back when I reviewed plans, I endeavored to follow the law.
If a building was exempt, I checked it based on the law not my personal views about what ought to require a licensed professional.
My goal was safety, not bureaucratic abuse of the public trust.
Exempt buildings by unlicensed designers were generally more trouble to review.
Because I took my job seriously, I enjoyed the challenge.
First I check my plans.
Then I sign them.
Then I seal them.
Then I enjoy personal liability until repose.
Back when I reviewed plans, I endeavored to follow the law.
If a building was exempt, I checked it based on the law not my personal views about what ought to require a licensed professional.
My goal was safety, not bureaucratic abuse of the public trust.
Exempt buildings by unlicensed designers were generally more trouble to review.
Because I took my job seriously, I enjoyed the challenge.
RickAstoria
-------------------
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2009
- Messages
- 531
Re: Lateral Calculations for Freestanding Pole Buildings
Clearly a good point.
brudgers said:
Clearly a good point.
Re: Lateral Calculations for Freestanding Pole Buildings
brudgers wrote
brudgers wrote
That’s sounds like my mantra, except for the sentence, "that exempt buildings by unlicensed designers were generally more trouble to review". I’ve had homeowners submit calculations that were as good, if not equal to a design professional’s calculations.
