Hope I don't ramble too much, but this is where the rubber meets the road on professional ethics. I've mentioned before that one of my peeves is that my state has written into the professional registration laws that buildings above a minimal size/occupancy must have an architect and says that the 2009 IBC is to be followed. Unfortunately, the system is only "complaint driven", such that the only time they hear of unlicensed activity is when someone complains. In cities and counties with a functioning building permit process, architectural activity is monitored and regulated. Where there is no building department, an entity who wants to build more often than not may contact the local city or county clerk and learn that they don't have a building permit requirement and that they can do anything they want, leaving the plan development up to anyone with a pencil or cad program and construction up to some local builder who is more than willing to build from any sketch.
The only complaint to the architectural board may be when some activist architect sees the building under construction and takes the time to inquire about whether an architect has signed/sealed the plans, or if there is some problem and lawyers end up trying to find how the plans got developed.
I see on Google Maps that a building very similar in appearance to the concept that I had designed is now built in a relatively rural area, probably based upon my prelim design which always carries the statement, "Preliminary concept only, not for construction". My prelim design phase is usually a "loss leader" and I am hoping to make up my expenses when I develop the condocs, thinking that if they like the design, they would also let me do the condocs. But, where there is no one to require a permit, the client may think that now that I have developed the plan layout, they can have it built of any materials in any configuration and still have a legal product. Maybe I need to provide more info in the early phase of the project.
I am currently trying to land a project nearby where the potential client wanted me to design a "safe room" for their plan. The plan was drawn by someone who has access to a simple cad program and has noticeable code problems. I've told them that I'd love to do the safe room, along with the rest of the plan, but that I can't do the safe room by itself, that would be allowing whoever drew the remainder of the plan to practice without a license. I told them it's all or nothing, in fact, it would be better if I didn't know about the plan at all, because of the state ethics law, even if I allow the project to continue without an architect at this point, it could look like I have a conflict with the code of ethics.
That news was a genuine surprise to my contact person as he had contacted the nearest city and was informed there was no permit required. He had the same info from the county. Yet my arch board says they have talked until they are blue in the face and had seminars and fliers out to counties trying to inform them that the state has overriding requirements for an architectural seal when not required otherwise by local officials, even though they are not a permitting organization and there is no state fire marshal or building department.
So now, yesterday I learned that a small church with close family ties to me in a number of ways in a small community and county with no permitting department has begun construction on a building where I had created a simple preliminary concept. I doubt they have hired someone else for condocs and am pretty confident they are building from the prelims. Do I turn them in? - tell them they had better hire me or someone for plans or I'll turn them in? - make them hire me? -offer to do an economy set of simple plans so they can have a signed/sealed set of plans? maybe it would be simpler to retire.
The only complaint to the architectural board may be when some activist architect sees the building under construction and takes the time to inquire about whether an architect has signed/sealed the plans, or if there is some problem and lawyers end up trying to find how the plans got developed.
I see on Google Maps that a building very similar in appearance to the concept that I had designed is now built in a relatively rural area, probably based upon my prelim design which always carries the statement, "Preliminary concept only, not for construction". My prelim design phase is usually a "loss leader" and I am hoping to make up my expenses when I develop the condocs, thinking that if they like the design, they would also let me do the condocs. But, where there is no one to require a permit, the client may think that now that I have developed the plan layout, they can have it built of any materials in any configuration and still have a legal product. Maybe I need to provide more info in the early phase of the project.
I am currently trying to land a project nearby where the potential client wanted me to design a "safe room" for their plan. The plan was drawn by someone who has access to a simple cad program and has noticeable code problems. I've told them that I'd love to do the safe room, along with the rest of the plan, but that I can't do the safe room by itself, that would be allowing whoever drew the remainder of the plan to practice without a license. I told them it's all or nothing, in fact, it would be better if I didn't know about the plan at all, because of the state ethics law, even if I allow the project to continue without an architect at this point, it could look like I have a conflict with the code of ethics.
That news was a genuine surprise to my contact person as he had contacted the nearest city and was informed there was no permit required. He had the same info from the county. Yet my arch board says they have talked until they are blue in the face and had seminars and fliers out to counties trying to inform them that the state has overriding requirements for an architectural seal when not required otherwise by local officials, even though they are not a permitting organization and there is no state fire marshal or building department.
So now, yesterday I learned that a small church with close family ties to me in a number of ways in a small community and county with no permitting department has begun construction on a building where I had created a simple preliminary concept. I doubt they have hired someone else for condocs and am pretty confident they are building from the prelims. Do I turn them in? - tell them they had better hire me or someone for plans or I'll turn them in? - make them hire me? -offer to do an economy set of simple plans so they can have a signed/sealed set of plans? maybe it would be simpler to retire.
--just wandering-
