What was said on the other forum that could be derived as a personal attack? I sent a PM to an admin, and went about my way trying to counter last the damage you have done.
Post by Richard Balkins,Bldg. Designer on Jul 13, 2008 at 9:47pm
wondering:
As for your questions -
Q1: Is the new theater nice? A: Nice is a subjective word. In my opinion, yes. Very nice, considering the vast signifigant amount of the work was volunteer labor as well as the significant amount of labor of our contractor at below standard prices. (Minimal cost). It is very impressive when considering all this.
Q2: Any more room? A: Yes. Seating of upto 148. All table seating. Larger stage. Nice back stage. Larger snack bar (to get your popcorn, soda and beer). Still a work in progress. However, a major step has been completed.
Rick Balkins, Building Designer - a designer involved with the design of the theater as well as volunteer in the remodel work.
"This is a public forum that is amongst the community in which you serve as a building designer. This behavior is damaging your reputation and also reflects negatively on building designers in the community.
Take a chill pill. This is by no means to say that you shouldn't speak your opinions and views but do it in a professional and kind natured manner and with respect of other people's views even if you disagree with them.
Bad reputation = ruined business. Take some more care in how you present your views and treat others.
Take care in what you say. What you say offline and in your home is none of my care or concern. Think of what you say online on a public forum as speaking in public. Think about what you say in email as you would in talking to someone.
In short, get a control over any of your antagonism of other people by speaking with care and reason and empathy and respect.
PS: Take care and hope you get better soon."
May 12, 16 9:08 pm ·
·
What was said on the other forum that could be derived as a personal attack? I sent a PM to an admin, and went about my way trying to counter last the damage you have done.
It doesn't take a damn slide rule to know what you were doing. You were character attacking versus objectively attacking what I said on the thread.
If I said something you don't agree with, fine. If what I said is wrong, fine. Correct it. If not, shut the fuck up. Attacking me because I am not a licensed architect is bullshit character attacking and you fucking know it. You had only been licensed in Texas for maybe 3 years. Get with the damn program, that doesn't make you a licensed architect in Oregon. I was elaborating on the historic intent of what kind of structures they are talking about needing restrooms as it pertained to gas stations. It isn't the gas pumps or canopy but the associated minimart or shop or whatever building that is part of the gas station business. That's usually a group M occupancy. In that case, permanent restroom(s) (1 or more) maybe required.
For comments about my so called "narcissistic personality", it is how our American society cultural and gender rules we live by.
I never publicly say I am 'wrong' to anything. In business, if you say you are wrong then you might as well commit suicide because your life and future in business or anything else is over. You can never be trusted for anything if you publicly admit you are wrong to anything. Society demand men in our culture to be infallible gods or the illusion of it.
It is how our society is and expects of us.
If you're wrong, you just internally reflect and acknowledge to yourself, accept it and move on, and learn. People don't trust people who publicly admits to a wrong. If they do, they can never be trusted to anything. Our society demands us (especially men) to uphold an illusion of godhood and perfection. It is our fucked up society that demands perfection and godhood or at least the illusion of it.
It is the pedestal we have to live on.
If you are wrong, you just don't say it publicly. Otherwise, the culture we live in will never accept you because you are fallible.
"If you’ve come to the realization you were wrong about something, then you should also assume other people have recognized this as well. Hoping they will just forget and move on is both delusional and insulting.
This is precisely why it’s better to admit and to rectify mistakes as soon as possible. In the process, you will be far more likely to retain the trust and respect of the people you work with."
You purported to be an AIA member. We know you like to wear the pin...
With that membership you commit to a code of ethics. Rule 2.105 obligates you to essentially admit to mistakes, by you, your firm or your employees, for the HSW of the public.
In your haste to upload your avatar photo did you forget to read the welcome packet?
Behind that 3 years of licensure is 7 years of documented experience...and 2 master's degrees. More than can be said about you. Try your best to detract and demean. I know what I've done and really don't care 2 shits about you at this point. What I do care about is the safety of others.
All that being said, thank you for reaching out to Jeff, and asking that the ban be lifted.
I talked to Ted Ames. I won't say much except I do acknowledge that there is a lack of sprinklers installed under the stage. In any case, I will be talking to the ASOC about that. I have no reason to not acknowledge it.
The last time I went under the stage through the trap door was before the sprinklers were installed in the building. It was a brief test and I was chosen besides the 'designer' but also because of my physical build.
Since they went through the trap door to check under, that's fine. It saves me having to check for that. Thank You, AFD (Astoria Fire Department).
It might come back to me to address the sprinklers under the stage. I might as well get to work on that anyway.
rwcb- congratulations on starting a shit storm back in 2006-07 and bringing it out of the closet in 2016 and finally being held accountable for it.
i will also talk to ted ames. he will tell me what apparently you don't want to tell us. asoc isn't going to talk to you. they're going to talk to the licensed contractor and the engineer.
i'm sure you're a slender waif and can fit through the tightest of trap doors but that is irrelevant.
If your name is not on the drawings, you are not an architect, the building is not exempt, why do you continue to insert yourself and HOW are you going to fix anything
You said you aren't telling us everything, but that you are admitting to the sprinkler issue because that's not your fault. Do you see how that makes us think that the things you're not telling us about are your fault? It's a very guilty sounding post.
And Jerome's got a good point: how do you think you can fix this, and why do you think you should even have that opportunity? You just seem to have a really odd understanding of how projects work. IF you were the designer of this project, you have continuing criminal and civl liability. But that is not the same thing as a continuing role as designer, or continuing access to fix issues that you create, in any way other than financially. You seem to even have the idea that if the fire department hadn't crawled under the stage then that would be something that would be appropriate for you to do. Dude it's 10 years later, it doesn't sound like the theater people even know who you are, and if you crawl around under their stage your role in that is not designer, it's creepy crawler trespasser.
May 20, 16 10:20 pm ·
·
If your name is not on the drawings, you are not an architect, the building is not exempt, why do you continue to insert yourself and HOW are you going to fix anything
JeromeS,
Are you licensed in Oregon? Have you physically measured this building?
The building was physically measured by a licensed engineer who apparently came up with a number several inches taller than you did. In this thread alone you made at least 10 math mistakes and admitted that you did not actually measure the interior because there were finishes in the way at the time - so you based it on visual observation and (mis)assumptions about materials. Why would anybody believe that you are correct and a licensed engineer is not?
May 20, 16 10:38 pm ·
·
JBeaumont,
You said you aren't telling us everything, but that you are admitting to the sprinkler issue because that's not your fault. Do you see how that makes us think that the things you're not telling us about are your fault? It's a very guilty sounding post.
There were some other stuff the Chief briefly referred to but didn't elaborate. I am not putting any particular words in his mouth. That's why I am not talking about the other issues. The one thing that was definitively or confirmed enough that I can repeat was the stage not being sprinklered.
And Jerome's got a good point: how do you think you can fix this, and why do you think you should even have that opportunity? You just seem to have a really odd understanding of how projects work. IF you were the designer of this project, you have continuing criminal and civl liability. But that is not the same thing as a continuing role as designer, or continuing access to fix issues that you create, in any way other than financially. You seem to even have the idea that if the fire department hadn't crawled under the stage then that would be something that would be appropriate for you to do. Dude it's 10 years later, it doesn't sound like the theater people even know who you are, and if you crawl around under their stage your role in that is not designer, it's creepy crawler trespasser.
There are a lot of people who volunteer for the Astor Street Opry Company. However, I wasn't directly involved with all the volunteers. You have to talk to the right individuals. Did you talk to the particular individuals involved at the time? There are a number of individuals who would know. Talk to the right individuals.
PS: I don't need to crawl under the stage. I do know how the framing of the stage is.
Rich I'm not trying to scare you. I'm holding you accountable for this project since YOU continue to claim ownership for it. And doubly so since you claim to be so experienced and competent. So you see. You are in fact scared.
Rick it doesn't matter whether some volunteer knows you or not. IF you were a designer on it, that role ended years ago. At this point you don't have any rights to "help" or "fix" anything in any way, other than financially.
May 20, 16 11:22 pm ·
·
The building was physically measured by a licensed engineer who apparently came up with a number several inches taller than you did. In this thread alone you made at least 10 math mistakes and admitted that you did not actually measure the interior because there were finishes in the way at the time - so you based it on visual observation and (mis)assumptions about materials. Why would anybody believe that you are correct and a licensed engineer is not?
Name the engineer's plans. I showed you the exact photos and they CLEARLY show you that there can NOT possibly support 3 additional bricks on the pilasters than what I told you. If you even remotely have the tools and ability to use two pilasters and take a horizontal cross reference which I did to count the rows.
The CMU including mortar joint is 8-INCHES not 8-1/4" or 8.5" or any other.
You mentioned there is 17 CMUs. YES, 17-CMUs.
3 rows of CMU's that are nom. 8" high x 6" thick x 16" long forming the parapets. There is 14 rows of 8x8x16 nom. CMUs. There is 25"-26.5" of reinforced concrete foundation wall.
Mathematically, that's 19'-7 3/4" to 19'-9 1/4" height to the HIGHEST overhead interior finish (not some concealed space at the very ridge. I drew it in CAD for dimensional measurements with exactly 5:12 pitch. What you FAIL to understand is when this truss was put in in the late 40s or early 1950s, 5:12 pitch was typically 22.5 degrees when using a rafter square. However, since trusses can be made to a more accurate 5:12 but that's something else altogether. In any case, I drew it in CAD with a full precision 5:12 pitch angle to the 8th decimal place.
Try to know and identify the actual overhead interior finish. That is what determines if a building is exempt or not. It isn't the height to the top of the roof that determines whether the building is exempt or not exempt.
Did you not learn that in the statutory law of Oregon?
I still have about 2" of interior finish.
Since I am not seeing the engineer's drawings in the first place, I can tell you pretty quickly that the roof pitch is probably extrapolated from an angle tool. Using a laser measure may result in the laser bouncing around and the meter giving an error response. I had actually had a measurement done from up at the roof with the tape coming down from the roof the highest point in the ceiling down to the ground. We were still running under 20'. I recollect 19'-9" to 19'-11". When I say, 19'-10"... that's jives with the floor tapering to the middle a little bit like about 3/4 of an inch. We had to shim with about the thickness of a piece of plywood at the middle. None of the shims were ever the thickness of a 2x.
When you tell me there is some additional row of CMUs, it doesn't match anything. You are just trying to fuck with me with some mind game. I'm not going to play this mind game with you.
You either show up here in Astoria and we go to the site and measure it or shut the hell up.
May 21, 16 12:00 am ·
·
no_form,
Rich I'm not trying to scare you. I'm holding you accountable for this project since YOU continue to claim ownership for it. And doubly so since you claim to be so experienced and competent. So you see. You are in fact scared.
Don't confuse annoying me with fear.
May 21, 16 12:02 am ·
·
JBeaumont,
Rick it doesn't matter whether some volunteer knows you or not. IF you were a designer on it, that role ended years ago. At this point you don't have any rights to "help" or "fix" anything in any way, other than financially.
There is nothing that stops me from preparing plans for correcting such issues and coming to the ASOC board of directors with it. Technically, a number of the issues are in fact a bit of the client and the contractor's fault in certain things. Instead of waiting for proper drawings to be prepared with the corrections made for the code requirements.
Once the permits are issued, it kind of ties my hand from just changing it at my whim without some issues.
Rich, your hands are not tied to this project. You just wish they were. What is it that I'm doing to annoy you? Is it that you don't want to be discredited in your community by Lisa and the fire chief?
When "fail" was a popular meme your 32" = 2'-6" is the perfect example. So really that's what you want recognition for?
May 21, 16 12:17 am ·
·
Yes, how about everybody, just stop this cockblocking, bullshit drama.
The theater has a set of drawings with a title block reading "Stricker Engineering", stamped and signed by an engineer, dated March 8, 2014, that indicate field measurements confirm 20'-2 1/2" to the highest point of the trusses. Again: this is to the highest point of the trusses, NOT to the ridge or the underside of the ceiling - that is a few inches higher. This is not a "mind game", it's fact. The trusses rest above the 17th row of CMU, with 4 additional rows above to complete the parapet. My presence in Astoria would not change these facts in any way. Several others told you that it was obvious from photos that the former garage door was obviously 10 feet when you were claiming 9 feet, and they turned out to be correct, and you turned out to be wrong. Even more people are telling you there are more than more than 50 bricks when you're counting 48. 50+ bricks jives with an engineer's stamped drawing, while your version does not. You also admitted in the thread about measuring a rectangular 2-story single family home with a drone that you do not know how to operate a tape measure. Odds are extremely good that you are wrong .
There is nothing that stops me from preparing plans for correcting such issues and coming to the ASOC board of directors with it.
What SHOULD stop you is that doing so would be additional practice of architecture without a license. While you *might* get leniency from OBAE regaridyour previous work on this project if you claim that you didn't know at the time that it was not exempt, there is NO WAY you could expect that leniency if you do additional work on this now. This thread alone is plenty to indicate that you were well aware that the building is too tall. Come on Richard, you claim that students who dimension drawings of imaginary hypothetical projects in studio are violating that law - how could you doing drawings of remediation to your mistakes on a non-exempt building not be considered illegal practice of architecture?
May 21, 16 12:27 am ·
·
That's because you and them fucking lying.
I'll give you guys credit that it's 10-ft height for the garage. How many CMUs units in height would a 10-foot tall door?
The bottom chord of the truss IS the 17th cmu row you counted the poured concrete wall as 3 rows plus about half a brick (not CMU... brick).
If you are to be accurate, the truss itself doesn't rest ON the CMUs. It rests on the brick pilasters. The purlins and roof sheathing rests basically on top of the 17th row. Row 18 of the CMU rows (assuming you start the rows at the floor level and go up.
How many rows of CMUs is it for 10 ft. tall garage door?
That's 15 ROWS. (the bottom three rows plus about 1.5" starting at the interior floor level is basically the poured concrete foundation wall). The pilasters are 8" taller than the garage door opening. The bottom chord of the truss is about 7-1/2" or one CMU row. (roughly). There is one 8" thick CMU row behind the bottom chord. Then it switches to the 6" thick CMUs to support the rafters and purlins and roof sheathing/etc. Personally, at the time, I didn't measure the parapets directly. So if it is 4 rows of 6" CMUs, fine. I just never directly measured it. I never felt a need to for the particular phase. It doesn't matter.
Based on that, this supports the CAD drawing I have.
I drew the truss (top and bottom chord structure) in CAD. I didn't bother yet to draw all the intermediate web components.
The number of 8" tall rows of the parapet is irrelevant for determining if the building is exempt or not exempt.
If you assumed the wall was all CMU from the floor up aside from the ~1.5" difference between floor and first row of CMU (instead of poured concrete stem wall), the 18th row would be the first row of CMUs that are 6" thick instead of 8" thick.
In AutoCAD, with an exactly 5:12 (that is 22.61986495 degrees), the highest interior finish height would be 19'-6 3/4" from the bottom of the first so called CMU row or about 19'-8.25". Assume some taper in the floor and you'll get about ~19'-9".
Even with a little give it can fall between 19'-9" to 19'-10".
He probably measured openings and their lateral position and height from sill side of opening bay to the ground. However, I doubt he precisely measured or counted all the CMUs and probably double counted a block or something.
The question I have is how did you get a hold of the drawings from Stricker Engineering? Architects and Engineers aren't suppose to hand off drawings of clients past or present to any ol' person in the first place. You aren't suppose to ask for them unless you have a commissioned with the owners of the property in question. You do understand that these drawings are never submitted for permits by clients.
I don't believe the people on this forum actually did any counting of the brick rows of the pilaster. They did not do it and I don't buy it for a second. They just made up numbers to fit your account because they are lying to support YOU.
Everyone of them are doing that to support you an architect. This is because, as an unlicensed building designer, I represent the enemy of the religion of licensed architects. You are like the Pope of the medieval period that promoted the world was flat any your army of Bishops and archbishops are lying to support the bishop and the religious order.
You guys are acting the same way.
In order to do a laser read, you need to be about about 80-90 degrees perpendicular to the surface you are shooting the laser at or you may get error readings. To achieve that, you are going to let a longer measurement reading than the actual straight line measurements. For measuring with tape, you need a tall ladder which I doubt will be set up by the client to run a direct measurement in a straight line. I doubt the engineer is going to stand on the truss chords.
If the engineer or engineering technician miscounted the number of CMUs from a rather short and quick walk through measurements, it might come to an error.
When I field measured, I had got about ~10'-10" from the bottom of the chord to the floor below. It was measured between 10' and 15' in from the wall. I was on a ladder to do that during demolition going on. That supports a 48.5 brick tall pilaster and a very slight taper to the middle of the room.
I spent enough time on this bullshit.
He has one too many CMU rows. Unless the drawing was proposing raising the trusses and adding a row of CMUs.
I spent enough time on this.
May 21, 16 2:24 am ·
·
JBeaumont,
What SHOULD stop you is that doing so would be additional practice of architecture without a license. While you *might* get leniency from OBAE regaridyour previous work on this project if you claim that you didn't know at the time that it was not exempt, there is NO WAY you could expect that leniency if you do additional work on this now. This thread alone is plenty to indicate that you were well aware that the building is too tall. Come on Richard, you claim that students who dimension drawings of imaginary hypothetical projects in studio are violating that law - how could you doing drawings of remediation to your mistakes on a non-exempt building not be considered illegal practice of architecture?
YOU ARE A LIAR. THESE PEOPLE SUPPORTING YOU ARE LIARS. They are lying to support you because you are an architect. They are lying because they can't handle the idea of an architect or engineer being wrong against an UNLICENSED BUILDING DESIGNER. You and them are no better than the religious nut jobs who did the inquisition those centuries ago because they did whatever their Pope said and you, sir, is like the religious leaders of the Catholic Church such as the Pope.
I stand against YOU and the entire Architecture profession if I must as long as they continue to support you blindly.
You might be right that Stricker Engineering put a height of 20'-2 1/2" but they could have miscounted the CMUs.
At this point, I don't give a fuck. You keep calling the building non-exempt and I'll contest it and I'll continue to contest it. Until the roof is elevated or the building is added on with an attached addition, I am going to continue to call it exempt.
May 21, 16 2:43 am ·
·
The more you guys keep pissing me off, I might just reach a point where I just won't give a shit about the licensing law.
Right now, JBeaumont, get your ass over to the site and measure it for yourself like a real professional or shut the fuck up.
Lol. Balkins, a real professional did measure it. Andy Stricker. And he measured it at 20'-2 1/2"
And if he is off by 2 1/2" it doesn't matter to him because he is licensed. But if you're off you get in trouble for practicing architecture without a license. You're a fraud, a fool, and a danger to your community.
You already don't care about complying with the licensing law. That's why you're always at the building department trying to get away with as much as you can.
Balkins you don't get to decide when this ends. You've really caused a big problem for the theater company. now the building department and the fire chief has had to investigate. Your actions were also reported to the OBAE. are you finally learning something from all of this?
May 21, 16 3:06 am ·
·
no_form,
Well, the law was illegally adopted through criminal bribery by AIA in using the state government to aid and abet criminal violation of the federal antitrust laws. In addition, it IS a violation of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution in that it violates through illegal abridging of 1st Amendment rights as it violates my right to express through the art of architecture. It unlawfully abridges those rights.
I have the RIGHT to practice any and all arts which includes Architecture. OBAE was never created under public procedure of law because the laws were not adopted under proper public notification to ALL VOTING CITIZENS of the state and the meetings were illegally closed to the public. Every law adopted at the time was illegally adopted and is mandatory to be repealed and then go through proper re-adoption under proper. That is the only proper legal way to do it.
DID Andy Stricker measured it or did one of his engineering technicians measured it?
If the garage door is 10' high. There can ONLY be 15 rows of CMU to the bottom surface of the top of the garage opening. The pilaster is one CMU row taller or 16 CMU rows tall. Then you have the bottom chord of the truss resting on the pilasters. The bottom chord of the truss is like 7-1/2" so basically a CMU row which is behind the truss end of the truss or heel of the truss. Then the next row above that, the CMU changes from 8" to 6" CMU to support the purlins and plywood sheathing and so forth.
I just posted a photo that supports that. Simple 3rd grade math would tell you the number of rows. 15+1+1. Technically its, 25-26.5" concrete stem wall + 12 CMU rows to the top of garage door opening + 1 CMU (to top of pilaster) +1 CMU row to the top of bottom chord (or more precisely to the top of the CMU behind the "heel" of the truss which you see a 2x4 horizontal board up there that seats the rafters and also provide some degree of support of the purlins.
Then you have 3 or 4 rows of CMUs that are 6" thick. Whether you count the parapet at the heel of the truss (the row above the pilasters) or the row above that is up interpretation.
To jive another 8" CMU row implies a miscount somehow.
May 21, 16 3:40 am ·
·
Balkins you don't get to decide when this ends. You've really caused a big problem for the theater company. now the building department and the fire chief has had to investigate. Your actions were also reported to the OBAE. are you finally learning something from all of this?
Eventually, I'll know who you are and then I'll find a way to write the final chapter of you in my life.
"YOU ARE A LIAR. THESE PEOPLE SUPPORTING YOU ARE LIARS. They are lying to support you because you are an architect. They are lying because they can't handle the idea of an architect or engineer being wrong against an UNLICENSED BUILDING DESIGNER. You and them are no better than the religious nut jobs who did the inquisition those centuries ago because they did whatever their Pope said and you, sir, is like the religious leaders of the Catholic Church such as the Pope. "
On page 23, the superego of Richard Balkins, finally stripped to its essence, reveals the persecution and inferiority complex that is his raison d'etre.
the real story is that the building is in fact not up to code, per the fire inspector. unfortunately, you having been down there once during construction doesn't matter, because you apparently didn't do a checklist for substantial completion of the project. probably, because dont know what those things are. re-affirming, once again, the importance of licensure when dealing with public health and welfare
CPBD exam specifications under review by NCBDC.
What was said on the other forum that could be derived as a personal attack? I sent a PM to an admin, and went about my way trying to counter last the damage you have done.
Ok, I see your point. $1.01 it is then. What say you Richard?
*counteract.
Damn autocorrect!!
submitted for architect's amusement.
http://driedsalmon.proboards.com/user/48/recent
Shanghaied's First Performance 2008Jul 13, 2008 at 9:47pm
Quote
Post by Richard Balkins,Bldg. Designer on Jul 13, 2008 at 9:47pm
wondering:
As for your questions -
Q1: Is the new theater nice? A: Nice is a subjective word. In my opinion, yes. Very nice, considering the vast signifigant amount of the work was volunteer labor as well as the significant amount of labor of our contractor at below standard prices. (Minimal cost). It is very impressive when considering all this.
Q2: Any more room? A: Yes. Seating of upto 148. All table seating. Larger stage. Nice back stage. Larger snack bar (to get your popcorn, soda and beer). Still a work in progress. However, a major step has been completed.
Rick Balkins, Building Designer
- a designer involved with the design of the theater as well as volunteer in the remodel work.
more gold from RWCB...
"This is a public forum that is amongst the community in which you serve as a building designer. This behavior is damaging your reputation and also reflects negatively on building designers in the community.
Take a chill pill. This is by no means to say that you shouldn't speak your opinions and views but do it in a professional and kind natured manner and with respect of other people's views even if you disagree with them.
Bad reputation = ruined business. Take some more care in how you present your views and treat others.
Take care in what you say. What you say offline and in your home is none of my care or concern. Think of what you say online on a public forum as speaking in public. Think about what you say in email as you would in talking to someone.
In short, get a control over any of your antagonism of other people by speaking with care and reason and empathy and respect.
PS: Take care and hope you get better soon."
What was said on the other forum that could be derived as a personal attack? I sent a PM to an admin, and went about my way trying to counter last the damage you have done.
It doesn't take a damn slide rule to know what you were doing. You were character attacking versus objectively attacking what I said on the thread.
If I said something you don't agree with, fine. If what I said is wrong, fine. Correct it. If not, shut the fuck up. Attacking me because I am not a licensed architect is bullshit character attacking and you fucking know it. You had only been licensed in Texas for maybe 3 years. Get with the damn program, that doesn't make you a licensed architect in Oregon. I was elaborating on the historic intent of what kind of structures they are talking about needing restrooms as it pertained to gas stations. It isn't the gas pumps or canopy but the associated minimart or shop or whatever building that is part of the gas station business. That's usually a group M occupancy. In that case, permanent restroom(s) (1 or more) maybe required.
For comments about my so called "narcissistic personality", it is how our American society cultural and gender rules we live by.
I never publicly say I am 'wrong' to anything. In business, if you say you are wrong then you might as well commit suicide because your life and future in business or anything else is over. You can never be trusted for anything if you publicly admit you are wrong to anything. Society demand men in our culture to be infallible gods or the illusion of it.
It is how our society is and expects of us.
If you're wrong, you just internally reflect and acknowledge to yourself, accept it and move on, and learn. People don't trust people who publicly admits to a wrong. If they do, they can never be trusted to anything. Our society demands us (especially men) to uphold an illusion of godhood and perfection. It is our fucked up society that demands perfection and godhood or at least the illusion of it.
It is the pedestal we have to live on.
If you are wrong, you just don't say it publicly. Otherwise, the culture we live in will never accept you because you are fallible.
Richard your Character is the problem - fraud.
^ RIcky's defense to everything.
Richard, do you have a parent or guardian we can talk to?
This is precisely why it’s better to admit and to rectify mistakes as soon as possible. In the process, you will be far more likely to retain the trust and respect of the people you work with."
http://elitedaily.com/money/entrepreneurship/success-admitting-when-wrong/937011/
RickiTickiTavi-
You purported to be an AIA member. We know you like to wear the pin...
With that membership you commit to a code of ethics. Rule 2.105 obligates you to essentially admit to mistakes, by you, your firm or your employees, for the HSW of the public.
In your haste to upload your avatar photo did you forget to read the welcome packet?
Again, What did I say? Be exact.
Behind that 3 years of licensure is 7 years of documented experience...and 2 master's degrees. More than can be said about you. Try your best to detract and demean. I know what I've done and really don't care 2 shits about you at this point. What I do care about is the safety of others.
All that being said, thank you for reaching out to Jeff, and asking that the ban be lifted.
i spoke with lisa at astoria building department this morning.
she said to contact the fire chief directly about their report.
also, she was getting annoyed because inquiries about this were becoming a huge time suck on their work load.
any word from OBAE or others?
Ted Ames
Fire Chief
503-298-2520
those poor civil servants. This thread should die asap.
Keanu says it best.
no_form,
Congrats in starting a shit storm.
I talked to Ted Ames. I won't say much except I do acknowledge that there is a lack of sprinklers installed under the stage. In any case, I will be talking to the ASOC about that. I have no reason to not acknowledge it.
The last time I went under the stage through the trap door was before the sprinklers were installed in the building. It was a brief test and I was chosen besides the 'designer' but also because of my physical build.
Since they went through the trap door to check under, that's fine. It saves me having to check for that. Thank You, AFD (Astoria Fire Department).
It might come back to me to address the sprinklers under the stage. I might as well get to work on that anyway.
rwcb- congratulations on starting a shit storm back in 2006-07 and bringing it out of the closet in 2016 and finally being held accountable for it.
i will also talk to ted ames. he will tell me what apparently you don't want to tell us. asoc isn't going to talk to you. they're going to talk to the licensed contractor and the engineer.
i'm sure you're a slender waif and can fit through the tightest of trap doors but that is irrelevant.
no_form,
What are you trying to get from all this?
I think we all want to see you run from this profession and crawl back to your mother's basement and play video games!
If your name is not on the drawings, you are not an architect, the building is not exempt, why do you continue to insert yourself and HOW are you going to fix anything
poop876,
Stop being a perpetual asshole.
No_form isn't 'scaring' me. Annoying me, yes.
You said you aren't telling us everything, but that you are admitting to the sprinkler issue because that's not your fault. Do you see how that makes us think that the things you're not telling us about are your fault? It's a very guilty sounding post.
And Jerome's got a good point: how do you think you can fix this, and why do you think you should even have that opportunity? You just seem to have a really odd understanding of how projects work. IF you were the designer of this project, you have continuing criminal and civl liability. But that is not the same thing as a continuing role as designer, or continuing access to fix issues that you create, in any way other than financially. You seem to even have the idea that if the fire department hadn't crawled under the stage then that would be something that would be appropriate for you to do. Dude it's 10 years later, it doesn't sound like the theater people even know who you are, and if you crawl around under their stage your role in that is not designer, it's creepy crawler trespasser.
If your name is not on the drawings, you are not an architect, the building is not exempt, why do you continue to insert yourself and HOW are you going to fix anything
JeromeS,
Are you licensed in Oregon? Have you physically measured this building?
Yes or no.
The building was physically measured by a licensed engineer who apparently came up with a number several inches taller than you did. In this thread alone you made at least 10 math mistakes and admitted that you did not actually measure the interior because there were finishes in the way at the time - so you based it on visual observation and (mis)assumptions about materials. Why would anybody believe that you are correct and a licensed engineer is not?
JBeaumont,
You said you aren't telling us everything, but that you are admitting to the sprinkler issue because that's not your fault. Do you see how that makes us think that the things you're not telling us about are your fault? It's a very guilty sounding post.
There were some other stuff the Chief briefly referred to but didn't elaborate. I am not putting any particular words in his mouth. That's why I am not talking about the other issues. The one thing that was definitively or confirmed enough that I can repeat was the stage not being sprinklered.
And Jerome's got a good point: how do you think you can fix this, and why do you think you should even have that opportunity? You just seem to have a really odd understanding of how projects work. IF you were the designer of this project, you have continuing criminal and civl liability. But that is not the same thing as a continuing role as designer, or continuing access to fix issues that you create, in any way other than financially. You seem to even have the idea that if the fire department hadn't crawled under the stage then that would be something that would be appropriate for you to do. Dude it's 10 years later, it doesn't sound like the theater people even know who you are, and if you crawl around under their stage your role in that is not designer, it's creepy crawler trespasser.
There are a lot of people who volunteer for the Astor Street Opry Company. However, I wasn't directly involved with all the volunteers. You have to talk to the right individuals. Did you talk to the particular individuals involved at the time? There are a number of individuals who would know. Talk to the right individuals.
PS: I don't need to crawl under the stage. I do know how the framing of the stage is.
Rick it doesn't matter whether some volunteer knows you or not. IF you were a designer on it, that role ended years ago. At this point you don't have any rights to "help" or "fix" anything in any way, other than financially.
The building was physically measured by a licensed engineer who apparently came up with a number several inches taller than you did. In this thread alone you made at least 10 math mistakes and admitted that you did not actually measure the interior because there were finishes in the way at the time - so you based it on visual observation and (mis)assumptions about materials. Why would anybody believe that you are correct and a licensed engineer is not?
Name the engineer's plans. I showed you the exact photos and they CLEARLY show you that there can NOT possibly support 3 additional bricks on the pilasters than what I told you. If you even remotely have the tools and ability to use two pilasters and take a horizontal cross reference which I did to count the rows.
The CMU including mortar joint is 8-INCHES not 8-1/4" or 8.5" or any other.
You mentioned there is 17 CMUs. YES, 17-CMUs.
3 rows of CMU's that are nom. 8" high x 6" thick x 16" long forming the parapets. There is 14 rows of 8x8x16 nom. CMUs. There is 25"-26.5" of reinforced concrete foundation wall.
Mathematically, that's 19'-7 3/4" to 19'-9 1/4" height to the HIGHEST overhead interior finish (not some concealed space at the very ridge. I drew it in CAD for dimensional measurements with exactly 5:12 pitch. What you FAIL to understand is when this truss was put in in the late 40s or early 1950s, 5:12 pitch was typically 22.5 degrees when using a rafter square. However, since trusses can be made to a more accurate 5:12 but that's something else altogether. In any case, I drew it in CAD with a full precision 5:12 pitch angle to the 8th decimal place.
Try to know and identify the actual overhead interior finish. That is what determines if a building is exempt or not. It isn't the height to the top of the roof that determines whether the building is exempt or not exempt.
Did you not learn that in the statutory law of Oregon?
I still have about 2" of interior finish.
Since I am not seeing the engineer's drawings in the first place, I can tell you pretty quickly that the roof pitch is probably extrapolated from an angle tool. Using a laser measure may result in the laser bouncing around and the meter giving an error response. I had actually had a measurement done from up at the roof with the tape coming down from the roof the highest point in the ceiling down to the ground. We were still running under 20'. I recollect 19'-9" to 19'-11". When I say, 19'-10"... that's jives with the floor tapering to the middle a little bit like about 3/4 of an inch. We had to shim with about the thickness of a piece of plywood at the middle. None of the shims were ever the thickness of a 2x.
When you tell me there is some additional row of CMUs, it doesn't match anything. You are just trying to fuck with me with some mind game. I'm not going to play this mind game with you.
You either show up here in Astoria and we go to the site and measure it or shut the hell up.
no_form,
Rich I'm not trying to scare you. I'm holding you accountable for this project since YOU continue to claim ownership for it. And doubly so since you claim to be so experienced and competent. So you see. You are in fact scared.
Don't confuse annoying me with fear.
JBeaumont,
Rick it doesn't matter whether some volunteer knows you or not. IF you were a designer on it, that role ended years ago. At this point you don't have any rights to "help" or "fix" anything in any way, other than financially.
There is nothing that stops me from preparing plans for correcting such issues and coming to the ASOC board of directors with it. Technically, a number of the issues are in fact a bit of the client and the contractor's fault in certain things. Instead of waiting for proper drawings to be prepared with the corrections made for the code requirements.
Once the permits are issued, it kind of ties my hand from just changing it at my whim without some issues.
When "fail" was a popular meme your 32" = 2'-6" is the perfect example. So really that's what you want recognition for?
Yes, how about everybody, just stop this cockblocking, bullshit drama.
The theater has a set of drawings with a title block reading "Stricker Engineering", stamped and signed by an engineer, dated March 8, 2014, that indicate field measurements confirm 20'-2 1/2" to the highest point of the trusses. Again: this is to the highest point of the trusses, NOT to the ridge or the underside of the ceiling - that is a few inches higher. This is not a "mind game", it's fact. The trusses rest above the 17th row of CMU, with 4 additional rows above to complete the parapet. My presence in Astoria would not change these facts in any way. Several others told you that it was obvious from photos that the former garage door was obviously 10 feet when you were claiming 9 feet, and they turned out to be correct, and you turned out to be wrong. Even more people are telling you there are more than more than 50 bricks when you're counting 48. 50+ bricks jives with an engineer's stamped drawing, while your version does not. You also admitted in the thread about measuring a rectangular 2-story single family home with a drone that you do not know how to operate a tape measure. Odds are extremely good that you are wrong .
There is nothing that stops me from preparing plans for correcting such issues and coming to the ASOC board of directors with it.
What SHOULD stop you is that doing so would be additional practice of architecture without a license. While you *might* get leniency from OBAE regaridyour previous work on this project if you claim that you didn't know at the time that it was not exempt, there is NO WAY you could expect that leniency if you do additional work on this now. This thread alone is plenty to indicate that you were well aware that the building is too tall. Come on Richard, you claim that students who dimension drawings of imaginary hypothetical projects in studio are violating that law - how could you doing drawings of remediation to your mistakes on a non-exempt building not be considered illegal practice of architecture?
That's because you and them fucking lying.
I'll give you guys credit that it's 10-ft height for the garage. How many CMUs units in height would a 10-foot tall door?
The bottom chord of the truss IS the 17th cmu row you counted the poured concrete wall as 3 rows plus about half a brick (not CMU... brick).
If you are to be accurate, the truss itself doesn't rest ON the CMUs. It rests on the brick pilasters. The purlins and roof sheathing rests basically on top of the 17th row. Row 18 of the CMU rows (assuming you start the rows at the floor level and go up.
How many rows of CMUs is it for 10 ft. tall garage door?
That's 15 ROWS. (the bottom three rows plus about 1.5" starting at the interior floor level is basically the poured concrete foundation wall). The pilasters are 8" taller than the garage door opening. The bottom chord of the truss is about 7-1/2" or one CMU row. (roughly). There is one 8" thick CMU row behind the bottom chord. Then it switches to the 6" thick CMUs to support the rafters and purlins and roof sheathing/etc. Personally, at the time, I didn't measure the parapets directly. So if it is 4 rows of 6" CMUs, fine. I just never directly measured it. I never felt a need to for the particular phase. It doesn't matter.
Based on that, this supports the CAD drawing I have.
I drew the truss (top and bottom chord structure) in CAD. I didn't bother yet to draw all the intermediate web components.
The number of 8" tall rows of the parapet is irrelevant for determining if the building is exempt or not exempt.
If you assumed the wall was all CMU from the floor up aside from the ~1.5" difference between floor and first row of CMU (instead of poured concrete stem wall), the 18th row would be the first row of CMUs that are 6" thick instead of 8" thick.
In AutoCAD, with an exactly 5:12 (that is 22.61986495 degrees), the highest interior finish height would be 19'-6 3/4" from the bottom of the first so called CMU row or about 19'-8.25". Assume some taper in the floor and you'll get about ~19'-9".
Even with a little give it can fall between 19'-9" to 19'-10".
He probably measured openings and their lateral position and height from sill side of opening bay to the ground. However, I doubt he precisely measured or counted all the CMUs and probably double counted a block or something.
The question I have is how did you get a hold of the drawings from Stricker Engineering? Architects and Engineers aren't suppose to hand off drawings of clients past or present to any ol' person in the first place. You aren't suppose to ask for them unless you have a commissioned with the owners of the property in question. You do understand that these drawings are never submitted for permits by clients.
I don't believe the people on this forum actually did any counting of the brick rows of the pilaster. They did not do it and I don't buy it for a second. They just made up numbers to fit your account because they are lying to support YOU.
Everyone of them are doing that to support you an architect. This is because, as an unlicensed building designer, I represent the enemy of the religion of licensed architects. You are like the Pope of the medieval period that promoted the world was flat any your army of Bishops and archbishops are lying to support the bishop and the religious order.
You guys are acting the same way.
In order to do a laser read, you need to be about about 80-90 degrees perpendicular to the surface you are shooting the laser at or you may get error readings. To achieve that, you are going to let a longer measurement reading than the actual straight line measurements. For measuring with tape, you need a tall ladder which I doubt will be set up by the client to run a direct measurement in a straight line. I doubt the engineer is going to stand on the truss chords.
If the engineer or engineering technician miscounted the number of CMUs from a rather short and quick walk through measurements, it might come to an error.
When I field measured, I had got about ~10'-10" from the bottom of the chord to the floor below. It was measured between 10' and 15' in from the wall. I was on a ladder to do that during demolition going on. That supports a 48.5 brick tall pilaster and a very slight taper to the middle of the room.
I spent enough time on this bullshit.
He has one too many CMU rows. Unless the drawing was proposing raising the trusses and adding a row of CMUs.
I spent enough time on this.
JBeaumont,
What SHOULD stop you is that doing so would be additional practice of architecture without a license. While you *might* get leniency from OBAE regaridyour previous work on this project if you claim that you didn't know at the time that it was not exempt, there is NO WAY you could expect that leniency if you do additional work on this now. This thread alone is plenty to indicate that you were well aware that the building is too tall. Come on Richard, you claim that students who dimension drawings of imaginary hypothetical projects in studio are violating that law - how could you doing drawings of remediation to your mistakes on a non-exempt building not be considered illegal practice of architecture?
YOU ARE A LIAR. THESE PEOPLE SUPPORTING YOU ARE LIARS. They are lying to support you because you are an architect. They are lying because they can't handle the idea of an architect or engineer being wrong against an UNLICENSED BUILDING DESIGNER. You and them are no better than the religious nut jobs who did the inquisition those centuries ago because they did whatever their Pope said and you, sir, is like the religious leaders of the Catholic Church such as the Pope.
I stand against YOU and the entire Architecture profession if I must as long as they continue to support you blindly.
You might be right that Stricker Engineering put a height of 20'-2 1/2" but they could have miscounted the CMUs.
At this point, I don't give a fuck. You keep calling the building non-exempt and I'll contest it and I'll continue to contest it. Until the roof is elevated or the building is added on with an attached addition, I am going to continue to call it exempt.
The more you guys keep pissing me off, I might just reach a point where I just won't give a shit about the licensing law.
Right now, JBeaumont, get your ass over to the site and measure it for yourself like a real professional or shut the fuck up.
And if he is off by 2 1/2" it doesn't matter to him because he is licensed. But if you're off you get in trouble for practicing architecture without a license. You're a fraud, a fool, and a danger to your community.
no_form,
Well, the law was illegally adopted through criminal bribery by AIA in using the state government to aid and abet criminal violation of the federal antitrust laws. In addition, it IS a violation of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution in that it violates through illegal abridging of 1st Amendment rights as it violates my right to express through the art of architecture. It unlawfully abridges those rights.
I have the RIGHT to practice any and all arts which includes Architecture. OBAE was never created under public procedure of law because the laws were not adopted under proper public notification to ALL VOTING CITIZENS of the state and the meetings were illegally closed to the public. Every law adopted at the time was illegally adopted and is mandatory to be repealed and then go through proper re-adoption under proper. That is the only proper legal way to do it.
DID Andy Stricker measured it or did one of his engineering technicians measured it?
If the garage door is 10' high. There can ONLY be 15 rows of CMU to the bottom surface of the top of the garage opening. The pilaster is one CMU row taller or 16 CMU rows tall. Then you have the bottom chord of the truss resting on the pilasters. The bottom chord of the truss is like 7-1/2" so basically a CMU row which is behind the truss end of the truss or heel of the truss. Then the next row above that, the CMU changes from 8" to 6" CMU to support the purlins and plywood sheathing and so forth.
I just posted a photo that supports that. Simple 3rd grade math would tell you the number of rows. 15+1+1. Technically its, 25-26.5" concrete stem wall + 12 CMU rows to the top of garage door opening + 1 CMU (to top of pilaster) +1 CMU row to the top of bottom chord (or more precisely to the top of the CMU behind the "heel" of the truss which you see a 2x4 horizontal board up there that seats the rafters and also provide some degree of support of the purlins.
Then you have 3 or 4 rows of CMUs that are 6" thick. Whether you count the parapet at the heel of the truss (the row above the pilasters) or the row above that is up interpretation.
To jive another 8" CMU row implies a miscount somehow.
Balkins you don't get to decide when this ends. You've really caused a big problem for the theater company. now the building department and the fire chief has had to investigate. Your actions were also reported to the OBAE. are you finally learning something from all of this?
Eventually, I'll know who you are and then I'll find a way to write the final chapter of you in my life.
Also the whole AIA conspiracy thing is rich.
ummm rich you just thretened to kill someone
This reminds me of the old Alfred Hitchcock movie with Anthony Perkins and Janet Leigh.
"YOU ARE A LIAR. THESE PEOPLE SUPPORTING YOU ARE LIARS. They are lying to support you because you are an architect. They are lying because they can't handle the idea of an architect or engineer being wrong against an UNLICENSED BUILDING DESIGNER. You and them are no better than the religious nut jobs who did the inquisition those centuries ago because they did whatever their Pope said and you, sir, is like the religious leaders of the Catholic Church such as the Pope. "
On page 23, the superego of Richard Balkins, finally stripped to its essence, reveals the persecution and inferiority complex that is his raison d'etre.
the real story is that the building is in fact not up to code, per the fire inspector. unfortunately, you having been down there once during construction doesn't matter, because you apparently didn't do a checklist for substantial completion of the project. probably, because dont know what those things are. re-affirming, once again, the importance of licensure when dealing with public health and welfare
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.