# two architects - one for design , another for construction



## Kevin0616 (May 14, 2020)

How feasible is it to hire one architect for the design and a different one for construction?


----------



## jar546 (May 14, 2020)

Kevin0616 said:


> How feasible is it to hire one architect for the design and a different one for construction?


Please elaborate


----------



## classicT (May 14, 2020)

One to perform design and one to perform construction administration? Is this what you are referring too?

I guess that you could, but any RFI/ASI would need to still be prepared by the design AoR.


----------



## Sifu (May 14, 2020)

I usually ask for the DP of record, or "in responsible charge".  I want ONE entity to be responsible for reviewing other work and making sure there are no conflicts.  This includes the engineers.  Code language for this is in 107.3.4.


----------



## Kevin0616 (May 14, 2020)

The cutoff line is the building permit.  One to work on getting the building permit.  The other one is to perform functions from the start to the finish of construction and the final sign-off.  I do not know what are the specific functions of the architect during the construction?  not much?


----------



## tmurray (May 14, 2020)

In Canada, this should not be that much of an issue. The first architect will be the one producing the plans and getting everything necessary to the building official for the permit. The second architect will produce all the required inspection reports for the construction inspections and certify the work is to code and in conformance with the plans.


----------



## cda (May 14, 2020)

Kevin0616 said:


> How feasible is it to hire one architect for the design and a different one for construction?




As in one designs the shell and another

Designs the interior?


----------



## cda (May 14, 2020)

Kevin0616 said:


> How feasible is it to hire one architect for the design and a different one for construction?




Or one may do Pretty and the other does code?


----------



## Kevin0616 (May 14, 2020)

@tmurray and others  Thanks a lot!


----------



## RLGA (May 14, 2020)

Completely feasible and is done on many occasions. The architect providing construction contract administration (CCA), if registered, can make interpretations of the documents and issue changes without consulting the design architect. This arrangement can be accomplished in one of two ways:

Design architect does the design through permitting, then another architect assumes the CCA responsibilities. There is no agreement between the design architect and the CCA architect. I've seen this happen on municipal projects where the municipality first hires an architect to do the design--the owner-architect agreement is for the design only. Then they execute a separate owner-architect agreement for CCA services. If the municipality didn't like working with the design architect but didn't fire them, they just don't sign a CCA services agreement with them and give it to another architect.
Design architect either does not like performing CCA services, or they are in a location that doesn't allow them frequent access to the project site (e.g., out-of-state). They will then hire another architect (a local one if the design architect is not local) to perform CCA services, but retain all rights through an agreement to approve changes, review submittals, etc.


----------



## Kevin0616 (May 14, 2020)

@RLGA  Thanks.  When you say "...but retain all rights through an agreement to approve changes, review submittals, etc," you mean to retain all rights to the original design architect, not the CCA architect?


----------



## khsmith55 (May 14, 2020)

I agree with RLGA with a few comments. If the "design Architects" Seal is on the Construction Documents it becomes a bit "sticky" if any changes are made, ASI's or supplementary drawings are issued/provided. At the very least, the CCA Architect should affix HIS/HER seal to ANY ASI's or supplementary drawings. Are you an Owner or AHJ? Just my thoughts.

Ken


----------



## tmurray (May 14, 2020)

Kevin0616 said:


> @RLGA  Thanks.  When you say "...but retain all rights through an agreement to approve changes, review submittals, etc," you mean to retain all rights to the original design architect, not the CCA architect?


That one would be more like the design architect hiring another architect to do the inspections and reporting for the construction, so the agreement is between the architects. This would likely be regulated by the Architect's Act in Ontario or through their professional association. Not necessarily something you would need to worry about in regular circumstances.


----------



## RLGA (May 14, 2020)

Kevin0616 said:


> @RLGA  Thanks.  When you say "...but retain all rights through an agreement to approve changes, review submittals, etc," you mean to retain all rights to the original design architect, not the CCA architect?


Correct.


----------



## RLGA (May 14, 2020)

khsmith55 said:


> I agree with RLGA with a few comments. If the "design Architects" Seal is on the Construction Documents it becomes a bit "sticky" if any changes are made, ASI's or supplementary drawings are issued/provided. At the very least, the CCA Architect should affix HIS/HER seal to ANY ASI's or supplementary drawings. Are you an Owner or AHJ? Just my thoughts.
> 
> Ken


Ken, I agree, that is why I stated "if registered" for the CCA architect. Only a registrant can modify another registrant's documents (if permitted within their discipline, that is).


----------



## Mark K (May 14, 2020)

In my opinion 107.3.4 is an attempt to regulate the practice of architecture.  The problem is that the entity adopting the building code does not have the authority to regulate the practice of architecture.  Thus such provision is not enforceable.

As long as any submission to the building department is stamped by a properly licensed individual it should be of no concern to the building department.


----------



## Kevin0616 (May 14, 2020)

I am the owner.  At this point, I have two options to move forward. 
The first one is to terminate my agreement with the current architect and find a new one to continue the design for building permit. 
The second is to continue with the current architect to get the permit (she will sign and seal the plan drawings for permit application). After that, I do not want to have anything to do with the original architect and hire a new one, to complete the project. I am not sure if option 2 is feasible - having nothing to do with the original architect after getting the permit.


----------



## RLGA (May 14, 2020)

Mark K said:


> In my opinion 107.3.4 is an attempt to regulate the practice of architecture.  The problem is that the entity adopting the building code does not have the authority to regulate the practice of architecture.  Thus such provision is not enforceable.
> 
> As long as any submission to the building department is stamped by a properly licensed individual it should be of no concern to the building department.


I don't think Section 107.3.4 is trying to regulate the practice of architecture at all. All it is asking is that the AHJ be informed when the registered design professional in responsible charge is replaced with another. 

For comparison, do you think that an owner would like to know if the design architect they hired decided to pass off their design responsibility to another architect?


----------



## Mark K (May 14, 2020)

The AHJ is informed of who is the  design professional when he sees the architects stamp on the submission.  We need to remember that while the design professional may have obligations to the owner it is the Owner not the design professional that has the obligation to provide a building in compliance with the building code and other laws. The design professionals documents are instruments of service that communicate recommendations to the Owner.

The building departments role is limited to the enforcement of building code.  The contract between the owner and the architect is not a concern of the building department.  In spite of language in the building code to the contrary the building code cannot regulate the practice of architecture or engineering and the building code has no ability to define the contractual relationship between the owner and the design professional.

The roles of the various design professionals is defined by the architect owner agreement which is not something that the building department has the power to enforce.  If the original architect hires another architect to perform certain services the original architect is still responsible to the owner.  Another architect would not take on QA responsibilities unless he had a contract so the possibility of the architect handing off CD services to another Architect who has no agreement with the owner and is not being paid by the design architect is hard to imagine.

Mandating one architect or engineer who is in responsible charge of the whole project is inconsistent with The Professional Engineers Act in California which recognizes that a professional engineer may have responsibility for a limited aspect of the project.


----------



## e hilton (May 14, 2020)

Kevin0616 said:


> .The second is to continue with the current architect to get the permit. After that, I do not want to have anything to do with the original architect and hire a new one, to complete the project..


That is possible, but the second architect can only oversee the construction, they cannot make any changes to the plans.  So if something comes up ... unforseen or hidden conditions ... you might have a problem.  
Check with your jurisdiction, see if the AoR has to submit a document at the end of the project to certify all work was done in accordance with the permit plans.  The second architect may not be allowed to do that, and the first one may refuse if you left on bad terms, and then you won’t be able to get a CO.  (In Maryland it’s U&O).


----------



## khsmith55 (May 14, 2020)

Kevin0616 said:


> I am the owner.  At this point, I have two options to move forward.
> The first one is to terminate my agreement with the current architect and find a new one to continue the design for building permit.
> The second is to continue with the current architect to get the permit (she will sign and seal the plan drawings for permit application). After that, I do not want to have anything to do with the original architect and hire a new one, to complete the project. I am not sure if option 2 is feasible - having nothing to do with the original architect after getting the permit.


Kevin, being the Owner creates another set of possible problems for you. If you decide to "fire" the original Architect mid-stream of the design and Construction Documents be cordial and up-front with her, DO NOT go behind her back and hire another Architect without her knowledge. I suggest you enter into a written Termination Agreement with her giving a "limited" release of Copyright, otherwise you may be opening yourself and the future Architect to civil liabilities (i.e. copyright infringement lawsuit). If you terminate her AFTER the Construction Documents are complete it probably isn't a Copyright infringement. I suggest you seek competent Legal Council to guide you.

Ken


----------



## Mark K (May 14, 2020)

Why do building officials want to regulate engineers and architects?  

Why do you refuse to accept the reality that as far as the building department is concerned if the building fails to comply with the building regulations the building department can only take action against the building owner?  It would be interesting to see the contractor's response if the building department sued the contractor because the building he constructed did not comply with the construction documents.  The building department would be laughed out of court.  Contractors play hardball.

Please note that the IBC does not have any requirement requiring a certification by the design professional.  Such requests by building departments are illegal.  These certification requirements appear to be an attempt to make the design professional responsible for the completed work of others over which the design  professional has no real control.  If this is a misguided attempt by the building department to limit their liability it should be recognized that in most states the building department has no liability for their failure to identify code violations.


----------



## Kevin0616 (May 14, 2020)

khsmith55 said:


> Kevin, being the Owner creates another set of possible problems for you. If you decide to "fire" the original Architect mid-stream of the design and Construction Documents be cordial and up-front with her, DO NOT go behind her back and hire another Architect without her knowledge. I suggest you enter into a written Termination Agreement with her giving a "limited" release of Copyright, otherwise you may be opening yourself and the future Architect to civil liabilities (i.e. copyright infringement lawsuit). If you terminate her AFTER the Construction Documents are complete it probably isn't a Copyright infringement. I suggest you seek competent Legal Council to guide you.
> 
> Thank you very much for your advice.  I really appreciate it!


----------



## Mark K (May 15, 2020)

Owner contractor contracts regularly address who owns the construction documents and how the client can use them.  In any case that is not the concern of the building department.  The building department just needs to focus on weather  the design complies with the code and was the building constructed in accordance of the code.


----------



## mark handler (May 15, 2020)

Done all the time
Design Architect may create great designs but cannot, or He/She does not want to, produce working drawings.
Turns it over to an architect that will produce the product.
OR
Design Architect is not Licensed in that state.
Turns it over to an architect that is licensed in that state.
OR
Many large corporations have architects that produce prototypical stores or hotels
Local Architects, take local responsibility for them.

There are also other cases, AIA did a White Paper Study on this 20 years ago.....
Done all the time

IN ALL CASES, PERSON SIGNING THE DRAWINGS IS RESPONSIBLE.
Any agreement or disagreement is a civil matter, between them.


----------



## Paul Sweet (May 15, 2020)

It is always best if the two architects have an agreement between them, to reduce finger-pointing when (not if) something goes wrong during construction.


----------



## ADAguy (May 18, 2020)

Kevin0616 said:


> The cutoff line is the building permit.  One to work on getting the building permit.  The other one is to perform functions from the start to the finish of construction and the final sign-off.  I do not know what are the specific functions of the architect during the construction?  not much?



E & O question, how does the contract read as to who is responsible for "methods & means vs code compliance" acceptance?
Is design architect indemnifying the "observation" architect for acceptance of design? Who responds to RFI's?


----------



## tbz (May 29, 2020)

As usual late to the party, but I have 5 projects on my desk that have multipal Architects on the projects', as noted by Mark, very common for one firm to be listed as the "Concept Design" and then one listed as Project of Record who prepares and seals the drawings.

Think in reverse, AOR highers Design firm to produce design and then their firm makes it work for compliance and oversees moving forward, but both have touched the project.  

I have a client, who's client always uses one of two interior design firms to design the entire multi building living structure and then the owner hires afterwards a local Architect and a separate Engineering firm to make sure the design complies with all local AHJ requirements and to seal the drawings for submittals.  The true design firm never is listed on any of the drawings sent to the AHJ.

Also look at the simple portion, I could be wrong here, but does not the code section refer to AOR, not "AOR's firm", and as thus it's a single AOR's Lic. Stamped on the drawings even though the firms name is in the title block.  Hence the true AOR is who stamped it, does every AHJ look to verify that the letter head is correct and a seal is attached, or do they check to verify every RFI has the same exact name as the AOR on permit application?   

As thus if the AOR passes on, quiets a firm, has parted the company or retires before a project is completed, in your question who takes over?  Is the project mothballed and started from scratch now, just because of one person's name and stamp on the submittal documents?.   

This is really a legal question the OP, posted in contract law, The simple question becomes who owns the copyrights for permitting and moving forward.

Architect "A" designs the project and provides you with drawings, what does the project owners contract with that architect say they can do with those drawings?  

Architect "B" agrees to take on the project moving forward, they are going to want assurances in writing that they are authorized to use those drawings, as is once they review them to make sure they agree with the design and that it complies with all requirements to be permitted and built.

Personally I work on the owners side everyday with many clients, specific to div 57000, and many architects on the same project.

Got one now, one design architect with 3 primary contractors, each Pri/C has their own architect hired by the owner to talk and deal with the primary, but all the RFI's come from the lower Pri/c architects all the time.  Never see anything come from the specific AOR by name, ever, for rfi's to the AHJ.    

"One person's norm is another persons confusion" Unknown Author

Regards - Tom


----------



## ADAguy (May 29, 2020)

Interesting discussion, Permit architect bears responsibility subject to state law and contract language. Often the designer/architect is not licensed in the project local.


----------

