# Self-Certification Program??



## Joker

As I'm sure most of you are aware there are cities around the country (Chicago, New York, Phoenix, etc.) that are allowing Architects to go through training and then certify that their plans are code compliant. Have you been involved with a municipality that has an initiative like this? If so please advise how you were involved with that municipality, and share your experiences.


----------



## cda

That is interesting

Do they do the inspections also?


----------



## JBI

Codes and code officials exist largely because design professionals (and contractors) did not necessarily do their jobs correctly. 
Letting the fox guard the hen house has never worked out very well...


----------



## fatboy

Amen.... I'm with JBI.


----------



## Keystone

Pennsylvania had or (still has I think), an expedited plan review process, if a DP lists a disclaimer on the plans stating compliance with applicable codes the plan review time is reduced to 5 business days.  When this was enacted we seen a rash of disclaimers and I can say a veryyyyy small majority made it through review the first go round or even the second. Further understand Pennsylvania does NOT have CEU requirements for Registered Architects.

Joker or anyone who can answer, what is the reasoning behind the Design Professionals Self Certifying, delays, qualified plan reviewers????


----------



## JBI

Keystone, these are primarily large, active cities that are probably looking to either reduce or not increase their building departments as a cost control measure. NYC for example has a line outside the door before the start of almost every day. Expediters wait on line for hours at a time for 5 or 10 minutes with someone who can accept their submittals, or discuss applications.


----------



## tmurray

We had a similar proposal from our architects and engineer societies, that as they are registered professionals, they are intimately familiar with the codes and should not be under the same scrutiny, but they could not demonstrate that their members had the required knowledge based solely on their credentials.  

I would agree with JBI. We have had architects and engineers for much longer than building officials. There is a reason that society thought this was a necessary role.


----------



## cda

Phoenix disclaimer projects::;


https://www.phoenix.gov/pddsite/Documents/TRT/dsd_trt_pdf_00491.pdf



https://www.phoenix.gov/pdd/self-certification-program


----------



## Sifu

I can think of a 1/2 dozen questions to ask right away that would disqualify most architects in my area.  Most of our plans don't get off the code information page or life-safety analysis without comments.  Is it because they don't know, too busy, too lazy, or just trying to please a client and get away with something?  Take your pick, any way you slice it, JBI has it...... The fox in charge of the hen-house!


----------



## fatboy

Truth Sifu, code analysis alone typically triggers redline comments.


----------



## steveray

I can barely get a plan that shows they are using the correct codes, nevermind analysis....


----------



## Joker

cda said:


> That is interesting
> 
> Do they do the inspections also?



No


----------



## Joker

Keystone said:


> Pennsylvania had or (still has I think), an expedited plan review process, if a DP lists a disclaimer on the plans stating compliance with applicable codes the plan review time is reduced to 5 business days.  When this was enacted we seen a rash of disclaimers and I can say a veryyyyy small majority made it through review the first go round or even the second. Further understand Pennsylvania does NOT have CEU requirements for Registered Architects.
> 
> Joker or anyone who can answer, what is the reasoning behind the Design Professionals Self Certifying, delays, qualified plan reviewers????


They're saying it reduces time drastically. This is merely speculation but maybe where it first started the city didn't have enough plan reviewers to handle the load at that time and the other cities fell in line because it sounded like a "Good Idea".


----------



## Joker

Everyone, Thanks for your replies. I'm also concerned about the Fox Factor. I've seen a boat load of bad plans and "creative" interpretations of the code by some of the so called  best in our area. I'm glad that I have the support of my superiors so far. Cities like NY and Chicago doing it makes it very hard to push back when there's opposition from above.


----------



## Mark K

Self certification kind of defeats the idea of having a building department.

At one time NYC claimed that they had to go to certifications because of the size of the jurisdiction. 
this claim can be shown to be not real if you look at the Los Angeles building department.  My sense is that they adopted self certification either because the managers of the department were not competent or because of politics.

Any jurisdiction where expeditors are essentially required is likely to be prone to corruption.

Before building departments get too self righteous it should be noted that engineers have stories about building plan checkers that do an inadequate job or are incompetent.  Most engineers welcome a thorough plan check but have learned that they cannot count on the building department to find mistakes.


----------



## Builder Bob

Can I self certify that I haven't had to much to drink before I drive.....?? We know how well that works out every day.


----------



## ADAguy

Checks and balance are implemented just to prevent what you suggest "Bob".
Are you trying to increase "Legal" business?


----------



## Noob

Sifu said:


> I can think of a 1/2 dozen questions to ask right away that would disqualify most architects in my area.  Most of our plans don't get off the code information page or life-safety analysis without comments.  Is it because they don't know, too busy, too lazy, or just trying to please a client and get away with something?  Take your pick, any way you slice it, JBI has it...... The fox in charge of the hen-house!



Seems like you guys are seeing the issue from only one side.  Have you ever thought the judicial system, lawyers, and lawsuits can serve to put those architects out of business (and often do)?  If Architects play fast and loose, their license is on the line and it's not that easy to obtain one in the first place.


----------



## mtlogcabin

Joker said:


> that are allowing Architects to go through training and then certify that their plans are code compliant.


How much training?
My understanding is Architects and Engineers get very little training in codes and how to apply them and this is very evident by 90% of the submittals we see everyday. from Architects and Engineers . 

In  addition there is JARS post  
"Listening to your client even when they are wrong"
Where some architects do not have the cahonies to inform their clients what the codes state.


----------



## Sifu

Noob said:


> Seems like you guys are seeing the issue from only one side.  Have you ever thought the judicial system, lawyers, and lawsuits can serve to put those architects out of business (and often do)?  If Architects play fast and loose, their license is on the line and it's not that easy to obtain one in the first place.


I would agree, that is the way it should work in theory.  But in practice if that was the case would we be having this conversation?


----------



## Pcinspector1

Start of soap box]

I suspect most clients here the dirty word " Fire Sprinkler System!" and go into a convolutions.  So the "Man who Draws" work's wee into the night trying to get around the FSS provisions.  

And then to add to the displeasure, we as a group at Code Hearings change the next code cycle and reduce the square footage in a occupancy increasing the dependencies of said FSS. 

I just did a review on an existing structure with mixed occupancy and about wore out the pages flipping back and forth. My code book has tabs, yellow, orange high lighter and red pencil marks all over it. The code has now become so complicated to do a review I'd like to farm it out. With pressures from the DP's client, I can see why some of us doing plan review have to provide a list of questions over and over to DP, and they stamped it, dated it and signed it prior to review.

I'm with a minimal education and bad grhammer to boot providing a list of code issues to correct. What's wrong with this picture, how does anything stay upright and not fall down, catch on fire or insult a millennial?

I ask who's fault is it?

End of soap box]


----------



## Rick18071

So if the architect approves their own plans what happens when the inspector fails an inspection for something major like when sprinklers are required and none are installed or an elevator is required and none are on the plans. Does the architect pay for their own mistakes?

I know around here if the architect screws up and  does not have required sprinklers on the plans or something else is missing they charge the owner to pay for the new plans.


----------



## Builder Bob

Prior to 1997, a contractor could apply for a permit and receive the certificate of occupancy the same day by affidavit......It is amazing how the call volume of area fire departments has shifted from structure fires to medical in the last two decades. Just saying from past experiences, self certification is only as good as the profit that can be made at other people expense....


----------



## Builder Bob

Prior to 1997, a contractor could apply for a permit and receive the certificate of occupancy the same day by affidavit......It is amazing how the call volume of area fire departments has shifted from structure fires to medical in the last two decades. Just saying from past experiences, self certification is only as good as the profit that can be made at other people expense....


----------



## ICE

In San Bernardino county plans are not checked if stamped by an architect or engineer.  Well that was some years ago and I don’t know if that’s changed.  I knew an inspector that went to work there and couldn’t handle dealing with the messed up plans. He didn’t last an entire year.  Last year I met an individual that said his last day as a solar company representative was that day. He had been hired as an inspector for SB County.  He was clueless about anything electrical.


----------



## ADAguy

And their E & O Carriers will continue to insure them? "Duh" So no more inspectors too?
Is this a residual effect of the rise of the CM's?


----------



## steveray

Noob said:


> Seems like you guys are seeing the issue from only one side.  Have you ever thought the judicial system, lawyers, and lawsuits can serve to put those architects out of business (and often do)?  If Architects play fast and loose, their license is on the line and it's not that easy to obtain one in the first place.


 
     We welcome your perspective noob!....It's hard to give someone else's opinion. I think that we are just of the opinion that the code knowledge on the design side is not where we would like it to be to where we think it might be a good idea. And the complications that could or would arise during inspections would be vast and expensive. For example, I met with a contractor the other day (plans prepared by a RDP) with a commercial vehicle garage that was over 5000 ft with no sprinklers planned. If that permit got issued and was caught on inspection that building might never get finished because of that giant change order and who is footing that bill?


----------



## Rick18071

Had a project of my own a few years ago and hired a certified architect to meet me at the job site. He was an older guy. He asked me what book I was holding, I said the IBC. He said "let me see it, I never saw one of those".
Architects are not required to take update classes here. We are going from the 2009 to the 2015 codes and the residential architects are clueless about the changes and it is not my job to teach them.


----------



## mtlogcabin

Rick18071 said:


> and it is not my job to teach them.


In my office it is our job to "teach" everyone the code. We do it very day through plan review and inspections. If the goal of the building department is to have safe code compliant buildings when you issue the CO then the entire building department staff needs to be part of the "team" that is designing and building the building. Sure it gets frustrating to see the same guys making the same mistakes 4, 5, maybe even 6 times before they start to do it correctly but once they do every building after that gets easier and easier to achieve compliance.  I am fortunate to work in a small jurisdiction and therefore 80% of our projects are built by the same DP's and contractors.

We are not an "enforcement" arm of government, we are a "compliance" arm of government. Our goal as a department is to work with a DP and/or contractor to help and guide them into achieving compliance with the codes starting with the design through construction phase until the project is complete. The process is sometimes a long educational one and sometimes it is an easy review and inspections because all the parties involved in the project have been "taught" the code and what is expected.


----------



## Rick18071

I get paid to do plan reviews not to teach the code even if I had time.  I could  "teach" them something wrong by mistake. I only need to say "plans do not comply with section XXXXX". Then maybe they will buy a new code book and tech themselfs.


----------



## JBI

Until quite recently Architects and Engineers were not introduced to the 'Codes' in college/university. Some schools are now transitioning to either electives or curriculum requirements for Code specific courses. 
Historically they studied the various Referenced Standards (like ASCE7). 
They all know that exits must be provided, but the standards don't really discuss how many, how wide, or how far apart the exits must be. 
That's what the Codes do, they fill in the blanks. 
I see an increasing number of DP's taking Codes classes, and in my home state those courses are accepted as CEU's for the DP's.


----------



## Sifu

Briefly saw a news story following up on the Boeing Max 8 investigation last night, all I heard as I walked by was "in the past, airline manufacturers have largely been allowed to self-certify their airplanes"..............................


----------



## Pcinspector1

Rick18071 said:


> He was an older guy. He asked me what book I was holding, I said the IBC. He said "let me see it, I never saw one of those".



Rick, I hope you didn't shown him your Building Code Scrolls"


----------



## Self-Certification

I'm very involved in self-certification in Phoenix, AZ.  Some surrounding jurisdictions allow it as well, many times basing their requirements on Phoenix's program guidelines.

Have well over 300 submittals since 2014, commercial & residential.  It's pretty much eats up our time such that I don't take on much architectural work these days, if any.

- Family Dollar and similar retail (8,000sf+)
- Medical marijuana TIs
- Medical family practice TIs
- Fuel canopies & kiosks
- Bars/Restaurants TIs & new builds
- Residential (remodels and new construction, some over 10,000sf)
- Residential townhomes & duplexes
- Model homes (aka standard plans)

The program does require me to retain 3rd party reviewers certified by the City to handle structural and electrical over 400 amps.

Approximately 10%-15% of our projects are randomly audited by the City, by way of them performing an actual plan review on projects we've already reviewed and which are already permitted and/or are under construction.  Except for our very first project back in 2014, no audits have come back with a "fail" status, though the City has caught a few items here and there that I missed.

I will say that the time savings factor is a huge plus for projects to start construction sooner than later.




Joker said:


> As I'm sure most of you are aware there are cities around the country (Chicago, New York, Phoenix, etc.) that are allowing Architects to go through training and then certify that their plans are code compliant. Have you been involved with a municipality that has an initiative like this? If so please advise how you were involved with that municipality, and share your experiences.


----------



## fatboy

"It's pretty much eats up our time such that I don't take on much architectural work these days, if any."

So...........you don't actually do the design work.

When you are saying "self-certification", you are really talking about you are doing third-party, a pre-plan review? that gets the plan review expedited?


----------



## Self-Certification

fatboy said:


> "It's pretty much eats up our time such that I don't take on much architectural work these days, if any."
> 
> So...........you don't actually do the design work.
> 
> When you are saying "self-certification", you are really talking about you are doing third-party, a pre-plan review? that gets the plan review expedited?


I guess to put it another way, we are providing 3rd party plan review services.  In this state, that would be similar to a Stantec or a Willdan that contract directly with the municipalities.

However, the self-certification program does not limit me to self-certify only work we prepare nor do we contract with the JHA.  We review complete sets of drawings as prepared by other architects, engineers, etc.  This year, out of the 40 or so projects we've self-certified, we have been the AOR only a handful of times.

Hope that answers your question.


----------

