no balkans, i give DD documents to clients all the time, but there is express verbal and written understanding that these are WORKING documents and are not to be used for permitting or construction. Likewise there's a very clear understanding that I submit documents to the city for permitting, the client does not submit on their own!
Rule number #1029582727 if you're an exempt building douche bag just give your clients the drawings and have them accidentally submit them for permit. Responsibility deflected. Score 10 points.
Deflect is all the Balkins knows how to do. If he was really bent out of shape that the client permitted from the DD drawings, he wouldn't have been out there volunteering labor for the project.
Even more to the point he should have gone to the building department and reported them. But that would probably open this can of worms on him. What a scum bag.
I just measured the existing building again, TODAY!
It is 40'-4" x 74'-10" for the CMU building. 55-1/2 CMU blocks (16" length blocks) along the N/S axis. At the NW and NE corners are 10x16 reinforced concrete square columns supporting a big steel beam that's about 32" deep. I can't recall exactly the width of flange but it's like 8" while the flange thickness was like ~3/4" thick.
You don't stay bent out of shape. You move forward. Once already started, you can't just walk away exactly. At that point, you try to move forward and try to make corrections where you can. I didn't mess with the sprinklers so much as that was the engineers work. The engineer could have merely request the stage to be floor sheathing to be pulled up as needed to install maybe 8 or 10 sprinklers per row along the first two rows going from audience to back stage. 6 sprinklers for the next two. (remember, a part of that includes a re-existing reinforced concrete ramp under the stage that the stage was built over. Note: The numbers are purely off the cuff as I could not say with absolute certainty that would be the correct amount needed. Since the sprinklers were being done by an engineer, I wasn't going to specify changes to the sprinkler system to the plumbing contractors as those were prepared by an engineer from my understanding.
Part of the problem was a lack of coordination between me and the engineers as they never directly contacted me and client/contractor directly contracted the engineers. I wasn't consulted regarding the sprinklers requirement and the stage. Would I want to do a project like this again in that manner? No. The first time I saw the sprinklers plans was when the plumbing contractor was working with it and installing the plans and was panicing a little bit when the measurements of the building and interior dimensions did not match the plans. I had helped resolve this issue when walking through this with the plumbing contractor. The pilasters (and trusses) didn't match the spacing of indicated on the plans. The center to center between the pilasters was ~12'-6" while the spacing to the front would not match and line up. So with only subtle adjustments with pipe length and alignment, it was still within acceptable tolerance from as far as the engineer was concern. I wasn't specifying any changes to the sprinklers but assisting in correcting the information.
Whatever engineer involved with the addition plans, they probably used the floor plans with the incorrect dimensions.
Yes, when I re-measured the building AGAIN today, I used a laser. As for the additions, they wouldn't really be concern with height.
May 3, 16 3:01 pm ·
·
Did you account for the joints spacing there Ricky?
Yes. The exact dimensions of the columns are slightly less. I measured them awhile back but for sq.ft., it doesn't matter so much.
The straight linear measurement would support what I am talking about given it has a ~1/2" of cement or cement-plaster coat over the CMUs. There's also coats of paint over that.
Balkins, in the last 48 hours your disaster has been reported 3 times including my own phone call to Lisa. Including citations of exact fire and ADA codes that were violated.
The fire chief of Astoria is now going to inspect the theater.
Apparently all of this work was done by a licensed GC in 2008.
She said you had nothing to do with this project at all. You're not on any of the documentation.
Congratulations on lying apparently.
She was "very familiar with Rich" and chuckled. Ahhh the village idiot. You are really are a laughing stock.
Even when calculated, the sq.ft. of the addition when measured is 22'-1" x 44'-1".
Even if it was 22'-2 x 44'-2". The ground area would still be over 2 sq.ft. under the 4000 sq.ft. ground area.
The client wanted to do the work in phases. Incrementally working it through.
IEBC 2006 was used. The Building Official informed me of the options to use for the project. In large part, 2006 IEBC was used as an approved alternative compliance to Chapter 34.
May 3, 16 3:22 pm ·
·
Balkins, in the last 48 hours your disaster has been reported 3 times including my own phone call to Lisa. Including citations of exact fire and ADA codes that were violated.
The fire chief of Astoria is now going to inspect the theater.
Apparently all of this work was done by a licensed GC in 2008.
She said you had nothing to do with this project at all. You're not on any of the documentation.
Congratulations on lying apparently.
She was "very familiar with Rich" and chuckled. Ahhh the village idiot. You are really are a laughing stock.
Actually, I was involved with the project. In the permit file also includes a schematic design drawings that I prepared as well. I didn't use a title block on them.
Where the character or use of an existing building or part of an existing building is changed to one of the following special use or occupancy categories as defined in the IBC, the building shall comply with all of the applicable requirements of the IBC: 6. Stages and platforms.
Rick that was your great chance to say that you were NOT involved, so that when the state board gets on your case about practicing architecture without a license you'd have an out.
I have a copy of a stamped drawing by Stricker Engineering, LLC that indicates that in 2014 they measured the interior floor to ceiling height of this building at 20'-2 1/2". I am sending that drawing to the board, along with your statements throughout this thread that you did design this renovation. You'd better come up with a damn good story about how this building was >2.5 inches shorter when you were working on it.
How many times does it need to be explained to you that Chapter 34, and IEBC, and the 20% of construction costs ADA exemption, all do NOT apply to conditions that are the result of your change of use and your new construction within an existing building.
As for the additions, they wouldn't really be concern with height. - Richard Balkins
Richie: they are concerned with height for exactly the reasons that you should have been: they have to design compliant fire separations. Their drawings recognize what you would not about the existing building: the roof assemblies are combustible, so the parapets aren't high enough. They designed compliant parapets and fire assemblies to address those issues. How could they possibly do that without being concerned with the height of both the existing and new portions? Also as I mentioned before, the plans are not solely for an addition - they also address some of the issues in the existing building.
Even if a building official told me I only had to follow one particular section, I'm still going to follow all applicable code. Building officials come and go. When it comes time for someone to get sued, the Architect is going to be first on the list. Obviously Rick escapes some liability with his ninja drawing borders. But, he is claiming the project here. Written confirmation.
May 3, 16 4:33 pm ·
·
On the west side, I see hints of possible brick facing where parts of the stucco broke off. It wasn't exposed at that time to see earlier. This would add about 3.5" to 4" brick plus cement coating between west CMU wall. The west wall was probably the "facade". with possibility of being a 40's era painted brick.
I may suggest putting an emergency exit at the NW corner where the window was but the door needs to in-swing or be in-set 3-ft. So a re-design of the light booth would be needed.
Rick I didn't file a complaint a long time ago because until this thread I never knew enough about the true horror of this project to have enough concern to seek out the drawings. Initially I was looking at the drawings in regard to the numerous code issues raised in this thread - I did not know that the building was too tall to be exempt. If you look back you'll see that a couple pages ago I even defended your statement about which projects are exempt. It was not until that point that it occurred to me to verify whether the building is actually under 20'-0" - and it turned out that this engineer had dimensioned that in conjunction with their design of compliant parapets and fire separations.
The engineer's section dimensions the floor to underside of truss, and the height of the truss from underside of bottom cord to highest point of truss. The 20'-2 1/2" is the floor to top of truss measurement - it is not even to the actual ceiling - that is a bit higher.
hey balkerina, you'd better go down and talk to Lisa. Make sure she updates the file with your name on whatever she can get it on. You need to make sure you get full credit for that death trap as you so desperately want it.
bench-i'm going to give it a few days for the fire chief to get out there and then I'll follow up with Lisa on Friday.
balkins, who are you going to suggest this to? the theater? the contractor? the fire chief? Lisa? not one of these people give's a shit about you and your completed un-educated guesses and opinions.
the only people who are going to take notice of you is the Architect Examiner's Board when they reprimand you for working on a non-exempt building. a stamped drawing at 20'-2 1/2" carries more weight than your lunatic ramblings about drones, theodolites, and google earth.
since your AIBD membership expired we can't report you to them. not that they would do anything. did you know they have a refer a friend program? wow, talk about a pyramid scheme.
I will file a complaint with AIBD as soon as he reenlists. He's an Associate member of AIA - he can be reported there too.
May 3, 16 4:59 pm ·
·
Sponty,
What is the roof pitch that the engineering drawings. Also, what is the size of the purlins he indicated.
Have you even took a protractor to any of the photos of the truss top chord to the bottom chord?
There isn't even enough CMUs or bricks in the pilasters.
What's the width of the building listed on the engineer's plans?
The purlins are 2x4s not 2x6s not 2x8s. The truss chord is within the tolerance of CMU block height. If you looked at the photos including the ones I have uploaded on 4Shared and if you like, I'll uploaded it to another site.
I'll see if the engineer is willing to send me a copy of the drawings or PDFs of it.
Rick I already told you yesterday: the engineer shows the same size purlins and rafters as you indicated, and a 5:12 slope. The engineer measured the width of the building at 40'-5". I told you that already. You measured it at 40'-4".
Are you remembering to add the bottom cord of the truss to the height of the truss? I can't figure out where your error is. I can see from the photos and counting bricks and CMU and seeing the trusses that the engineer is correct.
I also told you yesterday that your calculations are wrong concerning the rise and run of a 5:12 slope. You didn't like my quicker and more accurate way because you can't do high school trigonometry. Of course when I did it your way, by arithmetic, by using the rise and run instead of the angle (same exact thing though doofus, if you're using the correct angle) it took longer and there were more places for rounding errors - but of course I still got exactly the same result I got by trig. Your result is wrong. That's because you can't do math. That's not my fault or the engineer's fault - it's yours.
May 3, 16 5:15 pm ·
·
I talk to Lisa, and from what I been told, there are some stuff I need to check up on.
Mr. Balkins you keep demanding that others show you drawings and codes and so forth - but the whole thread revolves around whether or not you were ever involved in the design of this theater, and whether you designed it with 100+ life safety and accessibility issues.
Balkins: Prove that you ever drew the building, and prove all the things you say you drew correctly but the owner supposedly changed (and that you then helped build, even though you knew them to be dangerous changes). Upload the schematic or DD drawings that you did. Let me guess: "they're packed away in boxes now that I can't get to... "
there's nothing for you to check up on balk-eroni because as far as every AHJ is concerned you're not part of it. sure you can go down there and poke around like a creeper. You can go bother Lisa with your wikipedia knowledge on stand pipes and joist heights, but no one is going to listen to you or act on what you tell them. you're the village idiot of Astoria.
the only thing you're going to get busted for is illegally practicing architecture. and if anyone on here decides to copy and paste your written statements, a potential law suit, and if someone dies, a potential manslaughter charge at the very least.
if you really stood by your personal code of ethics and standard of care (as you touted in your very first post on archinect) none of this would have happened.
now stop pestering your local government and let them work on rectifying your death trap.
Balkins, Of all the professions to pretend to be, picking an incompetent building designer must rank somewhere below human speed bump or astrologist on any sane individual.
threesleeve, balkins is essentially an alchemist. whatever he decides to do, be it a theater, a house, or maybe even the Portland Building, he can shrink it down to 4000sf and 20' in maximum height.
you don't submit DD drawings to a owner? how does the owner review a design with their various stakeholders if they don't have drawings. I've never heard of any other way to be honest
Because I have an awesome job, I am able to pick my son up from grade school every Tuesday when my wife has to go into the office. We get a shaved ice on the way home as a regular treat. Today I got cherry...and because of catching up on this thread so did my home monitors and keyboard....damn it...that shit is going to be sticky forever now...Thanks Balkins!!!
CPBD exam specifications under review by NCBDC.
Holoroos!
no balkans, i give DD documents to clients all the time, but there is express verbal and written understanding that these are WORKING documents and are not to be used for permitting or construction. Likewise there's a very clear understanding that I submit documents to the city for permitting, the client does not submit on their own!
honestly man this is very elemental stuff.
Deflect is all the Balkins knows how to do. If he was really bent out of shape that the client permitted from the DD drawings, he wouldn't have been out there volunteering labor for the project.
Balkins, just helping you out: http://archinect.com/precisionpropertymeasurements/jobs
I just measured the existing building again, TODAY!
It is 40'-4" x 74'-10" for the CMU building. 55-1/2 CMU blocks (16" length blocks) along the N/S axis. At the NW and NE corners are 10x16 reinforced concrete square columns supporting a big steel beam that's about 32" deep. I can't recall exactly the width of flange but it's like 8" while the flange thickness was like ~3/4" thick.
What I just told you would confirm measurements.
That's a good use of your time.
Did you account for the joints spacing there Ricky?
Hey Rick:
E_I,
You don't stay bent out of shape. You move forward. Once already started, you can't just walk away exactly. At that point, you try to move forward and try to make corrections where you can. I didn't mess with the sprinklers so much as that was the engineers work. The engineer could have merely request the stage to be floor sheathing to be pulled up as needed to install maybe 8 or 10 sprinklers per row along the first two rows going from audience to back stage. 6 sprinklers for the next two. (remember, a part of that includes a re-existing reinforced concrete ramp under the stage that the stage was built over. Note: The numbers are purely off the cuff as I could not say with absolute certainty that would be the correct amount needed. Since the sprinklers were being done by an engineer, I wasn't going to specify changes to the sprinkler system to the plumbing contractors as those were prepared by an engineer from my understanding.
Part of the problem was a lack of coordination between me and the engineers as they never directly contacted me and client/contractor directly contracted the engineers. I wasn't consulted regarding the sprinklers requirement and the stage. Would I want to do a project like this again in that manner? No. The first time I saw the sprinklers plans was when the plumbing contractor was working with it and installing the plans and was panicing a little bit when the measurements of the building and interior dimensions did not match the plans. I had helped resolve this issue when walking through this with the plumbing contractor. The pilasters (and trusses) didn't match the spacing of indicated on the plans. The center to center between the pilasters was ~12'-6" while the spacing to the front would not match and line up. So with only subtle adjustments with pipe length and alignment, it was still within acceptable tolerance from as far as the engineer was concern. I wasn't specifying any changes to the sprinklers but assisting in correcting the information.
Whatever engineer involved with the addition plans, they probably used the floor plans with the incorrect dimensions.
Yes, when I re-measured the building AGAIN today, I used a laser. As for the additions, they wouldn't really be concern with height.
Did you account for the joints spacing there Ricky?
Yes. The exact dimensions of the columns are slightly less. I measured them awhile back but for sq.ft., it doesn't matter so much.
The straight linear measurement would support what I am talking about given it has a ~1/2" of cement or cement-plaster coat over the CMUs. There's also coats of paint over that.
The fire chief of Astoria is now going to inspect the theater.
Apparently all of this work was done by a licensed GC in 2008.
She said you had nothing to do with this project at all. You're not on any of the documentation.
Congratulations on lying apparently.
She was "very familiar with Rich" and chuckled. Ahhh the village idiot. You are really are a laughing stock.
Wait. Wait. Wait. Wait. Wait.
The hell?
Even when calculated, the sq.ft. of the addition when measured is 22'-1" x 44'-1".
Even if it was 22'-2 x 44'-2". The ground area would still be over 2 sq.ft. under the 4000 sq.ft. ground area.
The client wanted to do the work in phases. Incrementally working it through.
IEBC 2006 was used. The Building Official informed me of the options to use for the project. In large part, 2006 IEBC was used as an approved alternative compliance to Chapter 34.
Balkins, in the last 48 hours your disaster has been reported 3 times including my own phone call to Lisa. Including citations of exact fire and ADA codes that were violated.
The fire chief of Astoria is now going to inspect the theater.
Apparently all of this work was done by a licensed GC in 2008.
She said you had nothing to do with this project at all. You're not on any of the documentation.
Congratulations on lying apparently.
She was "very familiar with Rich" and chuckled. Ahhh the village idiot. You are really are a laughing stock.
Actually, I was involved with the project. In the permit file also includes a schematic design drawings that I prepared as well. I didn't use a title block on them.
The contractor was listed.
Schematic design drawings without a title block.
So... like a napkin sketch?
2006 IEBC
Where the character or use of an existing building or part of an existing building is changed to one of the following special use or occupancy categories as defined in the IBC, the building shall comply with all of the applicable requirements of the IBC: 6. Stages and platforms.
Rick that was your great chance to say that you were NOT involved, so that when the state board gets on your case about practicing architecture without a license you'd have an out.
I have a copy of a stamped drawing by Stricker Engineering, LLC that indicates that in 2014 they measured the interior floor to ceiling height of this building at 20'-2 1/2". I am sending that drawing to the board, along with your statements throughout this thread that you did design this renovation. You'd better come up with a damn good story about how this building was >2.5 inches shorter when you were working on it.
How many times does it need to be explained to you that Chapter 34, and IEBC, and the 20% of construction costs ADA exemption, all do NOT apply to conditions that are the result of your change of use and your new construction within an existing building.
As for the additions, they wouldn't really be concern with height. - Richard Balkins
Richie: they are concerned with height for exactly the reasons that you should have been: they have to design compliant fire separations. Their drawings recognize what you would not about the existing building: the roof assemblies are combustible, so the parapets aren't high enough. They designed compliant parapets and fire assemblies to address those issues. How could they possibly do that without being concerned with the height of both the existing and new portions? Also as I mentioned before, the plans are not solely for an addition - they also address some of the issues in the existing building.
so, because AIBD is just like being a real architect- did anybody file a complaint with them?
Show me the drawings, Sponty?
If 20'-2 1/2" height was the case, why haven't you filed a complaint a long time ago?
Are you measuring the height to the peak of roof ?
No words, show me the plans from Stricker Engineering.
no_form, I expect daily updates now. I am 100% serious.
And rick: you could just call them and get a copy yourself. Just saying. You won't do it, but you could.
I can't stop watching this disaster unfold.
oh i feel so bad for those poor building department officials in wherever it is balkins is from.
This is almost more entertaining the GOT.
what a soap opera
Even if a building official told me I only had to follow one particular section, I'm still going to follow all applicable code. Building officials come and go. When it comes time for someone to get sued, the Architect is going to be first on the list. Obviously Rick escapes some liability with his ninja drawing borders. But, he is claiming the project here. Written confirmation.
On the west side, I see hints of possible brick facing where parts of the stucco broke off. It wasn't exposed at that time to see earlier. This would add about 3.5" to 4" brick plus cement coating between west CMU wall. The west wall was probably the "facade". with possibility of being a 40's era painted brick.
I may suggest putting an emergency exit at the NW corner where the window was but the door needs to in-swing or be in-set 3-ft. So a re-design of the light booth would be needed.
Rickard Balkins: professional splitter of hairs.
Rick I didn't file a complaint a long time ago because until this thread I never knew enough about the true horror of this project to have enough concern to seek out the drawings. Initially I was looking at the drawings in regard to the numerous code issues raised in this thread - I did not know that the building was too tall to be exempt. If you look back you'll see that a couple pages ago I even defended your statement about which projects are exempt. It was not until that point that it occurred to me to verify whether the building is actually under 20'-0" - and it turned out that this engineer had dimensioned that in conjunction with their design of compliant parapets and fire separations.
The engineer's section dimensions the floor to underside of truss, and the height of the truss from underside of bottom cord to highest point of truss. The 20'-2 1/2" is the floor to top of truss measurement - it is not even to the actual ceiling - that is a bit higher.
hey balkerina, you'd better go down and talk to Lisa. Make sure she updates the file with your name on whatever she can get it on. You need to make sure you get full credit for that death trap as you so desperately want it.
bench-i'm going to give it a few days for the fire chief to get out there and then I'll follow up with Lisa on Friday.
balkins, who are you going to suggest this to? the theater? the contractor? the fire chief? Lisa? not one of these people give's a shit about you and your completed un-educated guesses and opinions.
the only people who are going to take notice of you is the Architect Examiner's Board when they reprimand you for working on a non-exempt building. a stamped drawing at 20'-2 1/2" carries more weight than your lunatic ramblings about drones, theodolites, and google earth.
since your AIBD membership expired we can't report you to them. not that they would do anything. did you know they have a refer a friend program? wow, talk about a pyramid scheme.
I will file a complaint with AIBD as soon as he reenlists. He's an Associate member of AIA - he can be reported there too.
Sponty,
What is the roof pitch that the engineering drawings. Also, what is the size of the purlins he indicated.
Have you even took a protractor to any of the photos of the truss top chord to the bottom chord?
There isn't even enough CMUs or bricks in the pilasters.
What's the width of the building listed on the engineer's plans?
The purlins are 2x4s not 2x6s not 2x8s. The truss chord is within the tolerance of CMU block height. If you looked at the photos including the ones I have uploaded on 4Shared and if you like, I'll uploaded it to another site.
I'll see if the engineer is willing to send me a copy of the drawings or PDFs of it.
shut the fuck up balkans. you weren't even involved on this subpar renovation that could get you sued.
have you done any real work? do you have one project to your name?
Rick I already told you yesterday: the engineer shows the same size purlins and rafters as you indicated, and a 5:12 slope. The engineer measured the width of the building at 40'-5". I told you that already. You measured it at 40'-4".
Are you remembering to add the bottom cord of the truss to the height of the truss? I can't figure out where your error is. I can see from the photos and counting bricks and CMU and seeing the trusses that the engineer is correct.
I also told you yesterday that your calculations are wrong concerning the rise and run of a 5:12 slope. You didn't like my quicker and more accurate way because you can't do high school trigonometry. Of course when I did it your way, by arithmetic, by using the rise and run instead of the angle (same exact thing though doofus, if you're using the correct angle) it took longer and there were more places for rounding errors - but of course I still got exactly the same result I got by trig. Your result is wrong. That's because you can't do math. That's not my fault or the engineer's fault - it's yours.
I talk to Lisa, and from what I been told, there are some stuff I need to check up on.
Step away from the keyboard Rick.
...he said, uncharacteristically vaguely.
Mr. Balkins you keep demanding that others show you drawings and codes and so forth - but the whole thread revolves around whether or not you were ever involved in the design of this theater, and whether you designed it with 100+ life safety and accessibility issues.
Balkins: Prove that you ever drew the building, and prove all the things you say you drew correctly but the owner supposedly changed (and that you then helped build, even though you knew them to be dangerous changes). Upload the schematic or DD drawings that you did. Let me guess: "they're packed away in boxes now that I can't get to... "
there's nothing for you to check up on balk-eroni because as far as every AHJ is concerned you're not part of it. sure you can go down there and poke around like a creeper. You can go bother Lisa with your wikipedia knowledge on stand pipes and joist heights, but no one is going to listen to you or act on what you tell them. you're the village idiot of Astoria.
the only thing you're going to get busted for is illegally practicing architecture. and if anyone on here decides to copy and paste your written statements, a potential law suit, and if someone dies, a potential manslaughter charge at the very least.
if you really stood by your personal code of ethics and standard of care (as you touted in your very first post on archinect) none of this would have happened.
now stop pestering your local government and let them work on rectifying your death trap.
... and did anybody catch that Balkins suggested measuring the slope of the trusses with a protractor, on a photo taken from the ground?
That right there is why we need licensed professionals.
threesleeve, balkins is essentially an alchemist. whatever he decides to do, be it a theater, a house, or maybe even the Portland Building, he can shrink it down to 4000sf and 20' in maximum height.
protractor - hillarious
balkins how do protractors work?
I'm still waiting for the explanation on Hydraulic Calculations? Can I use a protractor when I do those?
you don't submit DD drawings to a owner? how does the owner review a design with their various stakeholders if they don't have drawings. I've never heard of any other way to be honest
Maybe I'll take a drive up to Astoria this weekend and check out the local theater scene.
Because I have an awesome job, I am able to pick my son up from grade school every Tuesday when my wife has to go into the office. We get a shaved ice on the way home as a regular treat. Today I got cherry...and because of catching up on this thread so did my home monitors and keyboard....damn it...that shit is going to be sticky forever now...Thanks Balkins!!!
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.