• 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

Selling one's stamp

jar546

jar546

Forum Coordinator
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
11,051
Location
Somewhere Too Hot & Humid
Been seeing an increase of complete garbage submitted lately that I am quite surprised would come from a licensed DP. Stuff like trying to turn a commercial basement into an A-2 with an occupant load of 260, all egress back up 1 set of steps to the A-2 above and no sprinklers or ADA bathrooms.

When the DP was questioned I received the response: "I know, but I am only doing what I was told to do. I already told the client it would get rejected at plan review but they said to submit it that way anyway."

I have heard this and very similar stories a few times this past year or so. My response was always "What if a moron did plan review and approved it and your stamp is on it?" Why would you submit something that you knew was completely non-compliant? Isnt there standards for your to follow under the law?
 
I just got one today. DP did a change of use from a B to a M with no separations between it and the upstairs residential. Also no ADA. i told DP this won't fly. He says, "Deny it so i can appeal."

haha. dumbass
 
I had one the other day that was a tracing...of the 25-year old hand-drawn plans in the file...every sheet...along with the changes in the same exact format with the same exact printing style. The tracings submitted for permit were signed and sealed...originals no designer info whatsoever.
 
Builder Bob said:
Has been this way since the AIA board has advised practitioners to be careful of how much detail they are providing for construction for liability purposes...... (5 to 7 years ago..... article in AIA )
Click to expand...
What the Hell is "the AIA board?"

And do you know what the AIA is?
 
jar546 said:
Been seeing an increase of complete garbage submitted lately that I am quite surprised would come from a licensed DP. Stuff like trying to turn a commercial basement into an A-2 with an occupant load of 260, all egress back up 1 set of steps to the A-2 above and no sprinklers or ADA bathrooms.When the DP was questioned I received the response: "I know, but I am only doing what I was told to do. I already told the client it would get rejected at plan review but they said to submit it that way anyway."

I have heard this and very similar stories a few times this past year or so. My response was always "What if a moron did plan review and approved it and your stamp is on it?" Why would you submit something that you knew was completely non-compliant? Isnt there standards for your to follow under the law?
Click to expand...
Plans should be sent to the state board for investigation - it's that simple.

Of course the sort of approach it is symptomatic of is not an unexpected side effect of code officials who make up the code as they go along to the point that, whatever the AHJ says is the code becomes the path of least resistance...particularly in those jurisdictions which allow unlicensed individuals to practice architecture openly.
 
I think there has been a lack of enforcement which has led to a culture of "good enough" DPs, not an over-enforcement of non-existent rules. YMMV.

There has been a common trend of "I don't get paid enough" among DPs.. and I tend to believe them. However, if you are going to undertake a job, undertake to do it well or find something else to do.
 
TimNY said:
I think there has been a lack of enforcement which has led to a culture of "good enough" DPs, not an over-enforcement of non-existent rules. YMMV.There has been a common trend of "I don't get paid enough" among DPs.. and I tend to believe them. However, if you are going to undertake a job, undertake to do it well or find something else to do.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more...have even gotten the, well I can do this in other jurisdictions comment.

I have had no less than six Tenant Finishes come across my table in the last month by RDPs and they do not even have a door schedule, ADA compliance info, or let alone MEP packages. I did find out a contractor had taken the RDP's drawings without approval to submit. I got their attention when I stated if that was the case, the project would be referred to the State Board of Engineers and Architects. Two days later the RDP called me. I am waiting for their response before I send it in. It is almost as if the RDPs don't even read their own code of conduct for ethical practice statements, let alone the code books.
 
Papio Bldg Dept said:
Couldn't agree more...have even gotten the, well I can do this in other jurisdictions comment.I have had no less than six Tenant Finishes come across my table in the last month by RDPs and they do not even have a door schedule, ADA compliance info, or let alone MEP packages. I did find out a contractor had taken the RDP's drawings without approval to submit. I got their attention when I stated if that was the case, the project would be referred to the State Board of Engineers and Architects. Two days later the RDP called me. I am waiting for their response before I send it in. It is almost as if the RDPs don't even read their own code of conduct for ethical practice statements, let alone the code books.
Click to expand...
Just to disclaim what I said.. I don't put every DP in that boat. There are some very good ones out there. I was just making a counter-point.
 
On a whole our local Architects are pretty good We have ongoing discussions and even sit done meetings while they are in the design stage. It is the out of town and the high end home architects venturing into commercial that need the most "help"
 
Papio Bldg Dept said:
Couldn't agree more...have even gotten the, well I can do this in other jurisdictions comment.I have had no less than six Tenant Finishes come across my table in the last month by RDPs and they do not even have a door schedule, ADA compliance info, or let alone MEP packages. I did find out a contractor had taken the RDP's drawings without approval to submit. I got their attention when I stated if that was the case, the project would be referred to the State Board of Engineers and Architects. Two days later the RDP called me. I am waiting for their response before I send it in. It is almost as if the RDPs don't even read their own code of conduct for ethical practice statements, let alone the code books.
Click to expand...
I doubt you enforce ADA.

Door schedules are not required by the building code.

Your insistence that they be present facilitates an "other town" approach.
 
brudgers said:
I doubt you enforce ADA.Door schedules are not required by the building code.

Your insistence that they be present facilitates an "other town" approach.
Click to expand...
In our case, we do not enforce ADA but we must enforce chapter 11 of the IBC and the ANSI A117.1 standard due to state law. We get audited by the state for accessibility.

We require door & window schedules for plan review. We have every right to do so under the PA-UCC which dictates what must be submitted by the DP.
 
brudgers said:
I doubt you enforce ADA.Door schedules are not required by the building code.

Your insistence that they be present facilitates an "other town" approach.
Click to expand...
Yes, you are correct, I should not have said ADA. We enforce Chapter 11 and the ANSI A117.1. Thank you for reminding me to say what I mean.

I didn't insist they provide a door schedule, I simply said it was not provided. What I do insist be provided is adequate door information. If the RDP wants to note all doors as uniform and typical and provide the information, I am not going to tell them how to do it other than to offer that a door schedule is simple and easy example of how they can identify and note the minimum information required to ascertain compliance. Beyond that, I don't care if they do it in haiku, as long they demonstrate compliance.
 
I've never in a bunch of years been told so boldly by a DP that they were just doing what they were told to do. Hammer them (ask for the O&E insurance if necessary). We had a rash of this happening (a bunch of years ago), by PE's working for the local factory who wanted/needed additional income by stamping plans. Ask for the O&E, and you'll see a whole different set of plans come in as revisions.
 
Peach

Agree that the response that they were doing what they had been told is not acceptable You probably had justification for reporting them to the state board that licenses professional engineers but what basis in law do you have to require that they provide E&O insurance. I am not aware of any state that requires E&O insurance as a condition for practicing engineering.
 
I'm not sure it's fair to place all the blame on the DP's. They are doing what they are being told to do. If they don't do what an owner tells them to do, the owner will take his business elsewhere. It's a catch 22. Unlike the AHJ office, The end user, owner, tenant, contractor are all limited by money. It's personally one of my biggest issues I have with the ICC, it appears cost is rarely taken into consideration when they change the I codes every three years. (but that's another story) As a GC, I often submitt plans that I know have problems, even for the best design firms. I'm doing what the guy that signs my check is telling me to do. Most times the DP knows there's problems but they are working for and getting paid from an owner that's trying to control costs. "Submitt them as-is, you know plans review will have comments no matter what we put on drawings and we'll make the changes after we hear back from plans review. We'll kill two birds with one stone"

I'm working on one right now, it's an A-3 use tenant wanting to expand into a vacant B use space. I told the owner before he negitiated the lease and before there was an architect involved that he will need to add toilets and lavs. He says it cost too much. I get the cd's for the architect and no additional restroom fixtures added. So the Owner, Tenant, Architect and Contractor all know I'm submiting garbage. The plan is; they will wait for the application to be rejected and then apply for a code exception (to reduce the number of occupants to a real number instead of the book number)

It's a "them vs. Us attitude" instead of the old days when the AHJ was considered part of the team. We've created an monster and we're all at fault to a certain extent.
 
Tony you got it. It’s tough to review plans like those knowing that everyone is trying to skirt the code because of budget restrictions, and it is way worse now in the current economy. I would say that when I started as the commercial examiner that %90 of the plans submitted were wrong first time in. Now most of the architects in the area bring me in and work with me from the start of the project so that the property owners don't put them in those situations.
 
GCtony said:
... I get the cd's for the architect and no additional restroom fixtures added. So the Owner, Tenant, Architect and Contractor all know I'm submiting garbage. The plan is; they will wait for the application to be rejected and then apply for a code exception (to reduce the number of occupants to a real number instead of the book number) It's a "them vs. Us attitude" instead of the old days when the AHJ was considered part of the team. We've created an monster and we're all at fault to a certain extent.
Click to expand...
The Owner & DP could always take the 30 minutes to sit down with the AHJ and do a preliminary review, discuss alternative design options such as reduced occupant loads. Polarizing the issues into them versus us contexts is only one aspect of what you describe here. One must also consider the egos at hand, and the sense of entitlement all parties are capable of using to derail a process that really should benefit everyone, including the general public who uses the space. I guess what I am trying to say is that the monster only exists for those who want it too, and perpetuate it into a self-fulfilling prophecy of sorts.

GCtony said:
Unlike the AHJ office, The end user, owner, tenant, contractor are all limited by money. It's personally one of my biggest issues I have with the ICC, it appears cost is rarely taken into consideration when they change the I codes every three years.
Click to expand...
An AHJ usually has a limited budget on which to operate, and speaking personally, this AHJ does consider the cost of renovations and alterations required to comply with the code. That, however, does not abdicate you, your client, tenant, or whomever else you want to be against the AHJ, from complying with the adopted codes and regulations, just because it costs to much. An RDP, consultant or contractor can also be hired to consider these things as well, and sometimes, if done with a little thought and creativity can result in an alternative design which does not cost as much.

BTW, doing what the guy who signs your check only goes so far...and a DP should never blatantly abuse their priviledge just because their client tells them too.
 
GCtony said:
I'm not sure it's fair to place all the blame on the DP's. They are doing what they are being told to do. If they don't do what an owner tells them to do, the owner will take his business elsewhere. It's a catch 22. Unlike the AHJ office, The end user, owner, tenant, contractor are all limited by money. It's personally one of my biggest issues I have with the ICC, it appears cost is rarely taken into consideration when they change the I codes every three years. (but that's another story) As a GC, I often submitt plans that I know have problems, even for the best design firms. I'm doing what the guy that signs my check is telling me to do. Most times the DP knows there's problems but they are working for and getting paid from an owner that's trying to control costs. "Submitt them as-is, you know plans review will have comments no matter what we put on drawings and we'll make the changes after we hear back from plans review. We'll kill two birds with one stone" I'm working on one right now, it's an A-3 use tenant wanting to expand into a vacant B use space. I told the owner before he negitiated the lease and before there was an architect involved that he will need to add toilets and lavs. He says it cost too much. I get the cd's for the architect and no additional restroom fixtures added. So the Owner, Tenant, Architect and Contractor all know I'm submiting garbage. The plan is; they will wait for the application to be rejected and then apply for a code exception (to reduce the number of occupants to a real number instead of the book number) It's a "them vs. Us attitude" instead of the old days when the AHJ was considered part of the team. We've created an monster and we're all at fault to a certain extent.
Click to expand...
The AHJ should send the plans to the State Architecture Board.
 
brudgers said:
I doubt you enforce ADA.Door schedules are not required by the building code.

Your insistence that they be present facilitates an "other town" approach.
Click to expand...
True, not in the building code. However, the state of Illinois provides a "Manual for Code Enforcement Officials and Design Professionals" which states

e. Floor Plan

Show all floors including basements. Show all rooms, with their use, finishes, overall dimensions, and

locations of all structural elements and openings. Show all doors and windows, including door and

window schedules, if applicable. All fire assemblies and area and occupancy separations shall be

shown.

The front cover does also state this.

To Comply with the

Illinois Architecture Practice Act

Illinois Professional Land Surveyor Act

Illinois Professional Engineering Practice Act

Illinois Structural Engineering Practice Act

This manual is not law itself, and is not intended to expand or change the meaning or intent of any state laws, but is intended to provide guidance as to the Department’s interpretation and enforcement of the existing laws.
 
And the way to control cost is to control the scope of work, within the adopted building codes and standards. If they can't afford to do it right, they can't afford to do it at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top