venting about architects' ignorance o...

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message Liz O'Sullivan New member Username: liz_osullivan Post Number: 1 Registered: 10-2011 Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - 12:38 pm:    As an outside specifications consultant, I don't get to see bidders' questions on my projects very often. The project architect's response to this one nearly made me weep: Q: "What is the minimum R-value required for the roof insulation?" A: "Our understanding is the minimum required is R-20. Please confirm with sub-contractor that this is their experience and notify Architect." Richard L Matteo, AIA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: rlmat Post Number: 460 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - 12:45 pm:    Weep? I probably would have screamed! How did some of these "architects" ever get licensed without an understanding of the building codes? Yet, when I've had experienced designers ask me why we have to do something and I told them it was required by the Code, they'd ask if we could do the minimum - I'd tell them the Code was the minimum and got the "deer in the headlights" look. Richard L Matteo, AIA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: rlmat Post Number: 461 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - 12:47 pm:    P.S. I see a Change Order in their future. Lisa Goodwin Robbins, RA, CCS, LEED ap Senior Member Username: lgoodrob Post Number: 151 Registered: 08-2004 Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - 01:08 pm:    P.P.S. I see a lot of change orders and a very unhappy Owner in their future. Liz O'Sullivan Junior Member Username: liz_osullivan Post Number: 2 Registered: 10-2011 Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - 01:12 pm:    I felt like weeping because I knew the question from the bidders was coming. I had told the architect that the thickness of the insulation should be shown on the drawings. But it wasn't shown on the drawings (and it still isn't shown on the drawings). I'm the one who told the architect where to find the required R-value in the code... This is something I'd ordinarily blog about, but my clients know I blog, so I'm venting here instead. Phil Kabza Senior Member Username: phil_kabza Post Number: 490 Registered: 12-2002 Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - 01:55 pm:    Ignorance can be remedied, but lazy doesn't have a fix. I remember architecture school as being really really hard work. Maybe it isn't so where this sad architect went? The best you may be able to hope for is that you get so busy that you are forced to turn down projects he/she is assigned to. Liz O'Sullivan Member Username: liz_osullivan Post Number: 3 Registered: 10-2011 Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - 02:08 pm:    Thanks, Phil! I'm working on that! Ralph Liebing, RA, CSI, CDT Senior Member Username: rliebing Post Number: 1272 Registered: 02-2003 Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - 02:10 pm:    This may confuse them all the more, but send this to your client. Note who is responsible for code compliance!!!! 1. Huang v. Garner, 157 Cal. App. 3d 404(1984) found that the design professional was guilty of "negligence, per se", since the building in question was not designed in accord with the prevailing building code. [also, cited, Burran v. Dambold, 422 F 2d 133 (10th Cir. 1970). Richard L Matteo, AIA, CSI, CCS Senior Member Username: rlmat Post Number: 462 Registered: 10-2003 Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - 02:23 pm:    They must have missed the lecture on "Standard of Care" J. Peter Jordan (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - 02:26 pm:    Many architects I have worked with over the years assume that compliance with the "Code" is the Contractor's responsibility. What is left unspoken is that the Architect's responsibility for the building design to be in compliance with the "Code." The idea is that if the building is designed and documented properly, and the Contractor builds it according to the documents, the building will comply with code. I know it is a bit more complicated than that, but not much. Because the AHJs in this area do not look at the specifications, they do require that certain information which may usually be specified is shown on the Drawings (including required R-values). Part of my responsibility in coordinating specs and drawings is to know where I need to say "as indicated on Drawings" in the specifications. Nathan Woods, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: nwoods Post Number: 404 Registered: 08-2005 Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - 02:43 pm:    Quote: "They must have missed the lecture on "Standard of Care" Well, in any given graduating class, there is the top 50%, and there is the other half...maybe they think the Standard of Care is graded on a curve ? :-) Steven Bruneel, AIA, CSI-CDT, LEED-AP Senior Member Username: redseca2 Post Number: 304 Registered: 12-2006 Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - 03:35 pm:    "P.S. I see a Change Order in their future.' Oh yes, probably two. One for getting the insulation right, and then one to address the pretty detail of a guardrail or parapet dimensioned precisely 42 inches ( or insert your code here) from the top of the roof deck to top of the rail, with no provision for the thickness of the insulation. guest (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - 04:24 pm:    Overcome laziness, ignorance....and all of those other "resounding characteristics" by creating/facilitating an environment that better "mentors" everyone (you and I included). Where's the "Employer"? Are there workplace resources to help remedy those things that architecture schools are "deficient" in "learning" their students? Are there incentives to encourage "learning" the Code, legal standard of care issues, etc.? OP, if you knew the question was coming, why didn't you better ensure that PA would respond more "accurately"....presuming you have worked with the PA before (or at least knew of their level of technical knowledge...or lack of same)? anon (Unregistered Guest) Unregistered guest Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - 04:43 pm:    Not meaning to be insensitve with the following comment, but I am enjoying at least one of the results of the Great Recession at my firm, and that is I now get to work with more "A" teams than what I used to have to deal with - which was a lot of "B," "C," and even further down the totem teams. Layoffs have had a positive impact on the calibre of individuals I now regularly get to work with... The lower 50% have largely been dispatched. Cleaning house has been good for quality of product in my firm. I for one am not all that excited for the "good old days" when things went 100 miles an hour and we pumped out project after project and were sloppy and had many bodies in chairs electronically drafting (cutting and pasting) not knowing what the heck they were doing... Maybe, JUST MAYBE, this economic downturn will be a net positive thing for the profession of architecture - only the upper 50% sticking to it. One can hope. Scott Mize Senior Member Username: scott_mize_ccs_csi Post Number: 56 Registered: 02-2009 Posted on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 - 05:48 pm:    +1 Liz, Peter, Steven! This boggles my mind for the simple reason that, in order to show the roof assembly accurately on the drawings, the architect has to know the thickness of the insulation. The thickness of the insulation is dependent on the R-value. The (minimum) R-value is required by code, ergo... It is my perception that, while most architecture students work as hard as I had to, they spend all of their time - as I did - on design and presentation. (And reading whatever currently fashionable nonsense passes for architecture criticism and theory while they're in school.) There appears to be even less emphasis on structure, materials, and other technical subjects than there was when I was in school(and that's saying something!). I also have a theory about an overall trend: A century ago, we hired immigrants to do hard, unpleasant work like mining coal and making steel. Now we hire immigrants to do hard, unpleasant work like math, science, and engineering. Perhaps architecture will soon be joining that list. Anne Whitacre, FCSI CCS Senior Member Username: awhitacre Post Number: 1216 Registered: 07-2002 Posted on Saturday, November 26, 2011 - 05:27 pm:    Frankly, I'm stumped that a bidding subcontractor would ask that question and definitely wouldn't want that one on my job. Its possible that the architectural office in question works on projects in multiple jurisdictions and that one of them is in the process of changing their code interpretation. I've worked on many projects permitted under an old code where the AHJ decided to enforce some provisions (usually the energy ones) of the new code. They don't get due diligence points for their answer, but I can certainly understand the confusion -- only the confusion should have stayed in the office and not shown up on a written answer to a question. As for the detailing -- depending on what roofing insulation is selected (and that may have been an option on the project) the insulation thickness may vary. There should, of course, be a more or less thickness -- but if you change from polyiso to eps (for whatever reason) your insulation thickness may vary by 2 inches. But for a subcontractor, who works on dozens of projects a year (rather than 1 or 2) should always know the code requirements that affect their body of work. I'ld disqualify that guy right away. and as for the layoffs -- most firms I know keep their best marketers, not necessarily their best technical architects. I wouldn't be so certain you're getting the "A" team technically -- you may just be getting the articulate ones. Mark Gilligan SE, Senior Member Username: mark_gilligan Post Number: 430 Registered: 10-2007 Posted on Saturday, November 26, 2011 - 07:08 pm:    Anne It is the design professional's obligation to determine what the code requires unless part of the design was delegated to the contractor. Even if the subcontractor believed he knew what was the right answer the way the question was asked is appropriate. Robert W. Johnson Senior Member Username: robert_w_johnson Post Number: 170 Registered: 03-2009 Posted on Saturday, November 26, 2011 - 07:30 pm:    The question was not was is the minimum code requirement for the insulation. The question was "What is the minimum R-value required for the roof insulation?" A very legitimate question if the R-value was not indicated or specified. A very lame answer which does not refer to the code either - you could assume it does but it doesn't say so specifically. In today's world, the minimum R-values of the exterior envelope are often determined by thermal analysis and then checked against code minimums. John Bunzick, CCS, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: bunzick Post Number: 1345 Registered: 03-2002 Posted on Monday, November 28, 2011 - 12:08 pm:    Why do I wonder if this roof has the required slope to drain?