When letters of undertaking are required

[Troy Sabean]

Presently working on a fit-up of a portion of an existing building for a dental office. Pretty straight forward - new partitions, mechanical to accommodate, electrical, etc. Nothing structural.
Should we be required to submit an A-2 and hire an engineer or architect to inspect the progress of this project?

The AHD seems to think so... His reasoning is that the entire existing building is over 600m2 in area, making it a part 3 building, so therefore we would need to hire an architect or engineer to oversee the project. But the project is only in a small portion of the building, and it isn't anything complicated or alters the structure in any way. Also, we recently completed a near identical project in a different building without the call for the A-2.

 

[cda]

Welcome!!!

How is the salmon??

 

[cda]

Ok need to get my translater out.

There may be a couple of people on here that know the codes you are using

 

[Mark K]

The question of what work requires an architect or engineer depends on your state licensing law. What does it say?

If an Architect or Engineer is required then they must oversee the preparation of the documents. An unlicensed entity cannot do the work and then hire a design professional to sign the documents.

The IBC or IEBC do not require a design professional inspect the work. The building department performs some inspections and when required the owner must hire special inspectors to perform other inspections.

 

[north star]

@ = @ = @

Troy,

1st, ...Welcome to The Building Codes Forum !

2nd, ...so that we can attempt to assist you,
where are you located, and which construction
Codes & Edition are you using ?

Thanks !

@ = @ = @

 

[tmurray]

It's Canada, step aside folks...

Was the existing use Group D or is it a change of use as well?
Were the drawings sealed by an architect?
You mentioned mechanical and electrical modifications, we generally see a mechanical engineer design the changes to mechanical for ASHRAE 62 because they are the only ones than can give me a proper design and we always see an electrical engineer for fire alarm modifications.

 

[tmurray]

@ = @ = @

Troy,

1st, ...Welcome to The Building Codes Forum !

2nd, ...so that we can attempt to assist you,
where are you located, and which construction
Codes & Edition are you using ?

Thanks !

@ = @ = @

He should be using the 2015 NBC, Nova Scotia adopted it April 1st.

 

[tmurray]

The question of what work requires an architect or engineer depends on your state licensing law. What does it say?

If an Architect or Engineer is required then they must oversee the preparation of the documents. An unlicensed entity cannot do the work and then hire a design professional to sign the documents.

The IBC or IEBC do not require a design professional inspect the work. The building department performs some inspections and when required the owner must hire special inspectors to perform other inspections.

In Canada, certain codes (BC building code), provinces, or municipalities require letters of commitment from design professionals that they will be inspecting the work before work commences and letters of assurance after the work is competed to indicate that the design professional inspected the work to the extent that they are able to guarantee there are no significant deviations from the code, plans and specifications. This is used to force the inspection of construction by the designers.

 

[tmurray]

Pertinent section of Nova Scotia's Building Code Act:

2.1.1.5. Professional Design and Review
(1) The owner who undertakes to construct or have constructed a building or part thereof within the scope of Part 3 or Part 4 in Division B of the Code shall,

(a) ensure that an architect, professional engineer, or interior designer, as required, are appointed to undertake the design of the building or part thereof, and

(b) complete and submit a letter of undertaking in the form specified in Schedule “A” for the Field Review of Construction of such buildings.

2.1.1.6. Design Regulations for Structural Components
(1) Where the dimensions of a structural component are not provided in Part 9 of the Code for use in a building within the scope of that part, and such dimensions are to be determined on the basis of calculation, testing or other means of evaluation, the owner shall

(a) ensure that a professional engineer is appointed to undertake the design of the structural component, and

(b) when required by the authority having jurisdiction, complete and submit a letter of undertaking in the form specified in Schedule “A” for the Field Review of Construction for this structural component.

2.1.1.7. Site Conditions, Size, or Complexity Requiring Professional Design and Inspection
(1) Where the site conditions, the size or complexity of a building, part of a building or building component warrant, the authority having jurisdiction may require the owner to file a Letter of Undertaking and have appropriate Field Review of Construction letters submitted as deemed necessary.

2.1.1.8. Design Regulations for Sprinklered Building
(1) Where a building is required or intended to be sprinklered, the owner shall

(a) ensure that a professional engineer is appointed to undertake the design of the sprinkler system, and

(b) complete and submit a Letter of Undertaking in the form specified in Schedule “A” of the Field Review of Construction.

(2) Where the alteration of an existing building requires changes to an existing sprinkler system, the authority having jurisdiction may waive compliance with Clauses 2.1.1.8.(1)(a) and (b).

(3) Where Clauses 2.1.1.8.(1) (a) and (b) are waived, the design documents and test results conducted on the system, required under the provincial maintenance regulations made under the Fire Safety Act must be filed with the authority having jurisdiction.


So, really they are going to cite 2.1.1.7. for their requirements. It's ultimately at the discretion of the authority. You might be able to meet with them and get them the information they need without involving designers, other than that you will have to do what they want in this case.

 

[JCraver]

That seems like an easy way to save big money for every small town under that code - just disband the whole building dept., and require every project to have an engineer inspect everything.

 

[steveray]

That seems like an easy way to save big money for every small town under that code - just disband the whole building dept., and require every project to have an engineer inspect everything.

There are special inspectors, and we here have licensing law for certain projects for the designers to "sign off".....Neither, would I be willing to say do anywhere near the level of inspection of a Building Official here...

 

[JCraver]

There are special inspectors, and we here have licensing law for certain projects for the designers to "sign off".....Neither, would I be willing to say do anywhere near the level of inspection of a Building Official here...

I know. My intended sarcasm didn't transfer to that post very well...

 

[steveray]

Ahhhh....and normally I am good with that...

 

[tmurray]

That seems like an easy way to save big money for every small town under that code - just disband the whole building dept., and require every project to have an engineer inspect everything.

It does not completely remove the duty of care, but does limit the standard of care for smaller municipalities. In Canada, limiting the standard of care is the only way to mitigate our liability. Where smaller municipalities could not afford someone with the qualifications to inspect Part 3 construction, they can rely on inspections by registered professionals. Larger municipalities can not take as much advantage of this as they have a much harder time demonstrating the bona fide financial restriction from delivering the service.