They claim that they "learn the code by experience and this is the first time they have encountered this issue".

Learning by trail and error should not be done on your watch or on your budget. Sure, it is understandable that each job has the possibility of some component being new and there can be a learning curve around a specific issue. However, you are hiring them for their expertise. They should have taken notice early on that they have never dealt with this issue before, researched the code, and presented you with the limitations.

The designer's contention is that the city didn't flag the zoning error in earlier conversations

Not the city's job to consider all part of your build. This is why there is a streamlined process for zoning applications, so a builder can't finger point and say - hey you never told me about this during our conversation about a setback.

Bear in mind that this is a leading firm with price points to match that reputation.

Smoke and mirrors.

Sorry for your disappointment and the bind you are in. I'd review your contract with them and see what it says about their obligation to design to code. And, I surely would not continue to pay them any more until this is resolved.

Thank you for your reasoned and thoughtful response. It is affirming. I especially appreciate your recommendation to review the contract re: designing to code.

Is there a review process? In my county you can go to a review board to contest zoning rulings- for example I had a client want a porch that was too close to the road even though every other house on the block had a porch. I just had to show my design and the fact that others encroached the same or more. We don’t have a rule here that removing any one wall (in your case front and side) automatically counts as a full turn down, I wonder if that’s common? In any case I hate to say it but your design team should have known and if they designed a project that cannot be built I think they at least owe you a refund of design fees. This is why you hired professionals

Thank you @Hallett - that is the direction we are leaning. The design team discourages requests for variance, but it is beginning to look like that is the most logical next step. Our city's zoning department (apparently) has a reputation for being difficult to work with, but we scheduled a meeting with them to get a sense of how they work.

Is this in CA? Used to live in LA and I had heard of workarounds that did the addition right over the front facade without actually taking down that outside wall.

What does your contractor say? My contractor and architect in LA were locals who grew up in the town we lived in. They knew exactly how far they could bend those zoning rules before they broke them!

In our guest house addition we actually kept the front facade of the structure for most of the build, just like a Hollywood set with the fake frontage and then in one day it got taken down, rebuilt and tied into the new parts like nothing had changed. The builders figured out a workaround that didn't get anyone's attention!

It is all about tax dollars and being able to raise the assessed values! The local Tax Assessor was knocking on our front door before the ink on the COO was dry. Told him to leave and make an appointment since they had all my information on the permits! You also don't have to let them into the house and they can do exterior measurements to get their tax numbers. The building inspectors already checked inside during the different construction phases and the Tax Assessor has no right to enter your house.

I had a project where a zoning issue arose where my interpretation of the ordinance was not the same as the Zoning Administrator. My client, an attorney, agreed with my interpretation and hired an attorney that agreed with my interpretation to appeal the ruling. We lost.

It is my experience that there is no telling what will happen when it comes to zoning.

Our architect mis-placed the home on our lot, exceeding the Variances we received. The city missed the mistake and issued a permit.

However, our surveyor pointed out the mistake when he came to mark the excavation. The architect said, "Go ahead anyway."

Only when I sent the principals in the firm a letter with a cc to our solicitor (who also happened to hold the provincial bar association's real estate chair) did he grudgingly agree to adjust the plan. And quickly.

^^^ yikes!

We have built, remodeled, done additions and have never had the problem (horrible) you are having. Honestly, it never occurred to me how involved it is to pull a permit.

So, I googled the responsibilities of a licensed architect. Very interesting read. Bottom line is learning the code by "experience" is telling you that your firm didn't do diligence. Had he been thorough, (and there is a paragraph on this), none of this mess would be happening.

Hope this helps:

https://content.aia.org/sites/default/files/2017-03/EPC_Planning_Zoning_1D.pdf

So you paid for his education? Woulda been simpler for him to just coffee and donuts the head of the local office and get things clarified. He needs to pay for his own education, and refund the fees if there is no way around the edict from on high.

"Tasks

At the completion of your internship, you should be able to:

• Identify requirements of regulatory agencies

• Prepare and present submittals for governmental approval"

elcieg:

Thanks for linked correction. It proves that this isn't a rookie architect mistake as I posited. It is supposed to be learned by an INTERN before an archy even gets his shingle. Geesh.

1. Provided you can't leave the facade up and build around it, your path involves getting the variance as the first step. As important is knowing what is necessary to comply with the new construction ordinances. Both go together.

I advise that you get a second opinion. Find an experienced residential architect based in your town who knows the code like the back of their hand and is willing to consult. Have them take a look at the design. Ask them to evaluate whether they believe a qualified architect should have reasonably been able to anticipate this regulation coming into play. See if you can get it in writing. Use that evaluation as leverage to negotiate the next steps with this architect. Mistakes happen (and often on the clients dime) -- But if the architect cant even be bothered to read the code themselves, that doesnt meet the standard of professional care.

I just so happen to have finish my preliminary review of a Zoning Administrator's "STAFF REVIEW AND REPORT TO ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS" for a client's project that is having a Board of Appeals public hearing this coming Wednesday, I found the Zoning Administrator defines words contrary to the way they are defined in the Ordinance, applies parts of the ordinance not meant to be applied to other parts of the ordinance, and offers design changes. We should win, but I am not betting my life on it. My client is a retired attorney and knows what we are up against.

Find out what your architect's experience with zoning appeals are, and ask their advice. Engaging another local architect with more zoning appeals experience may be good.

Read the zoning ordinance (a good cure for insomnia) and see what the procedure is for appealing a zoning administrator's decision. Many ordinances look at a corner lot as having two front yard setbacks, which could create a 'hardship' or 'practical difficulty' for you. Your ordinance should explain what qualifies for a variance. Zoning ordinances are often found online.

It's hard to say. My house sits on a nonstandard lot. Before I even hired an architect, I spoke to the planning and zoning officials myself to determine how setback rules apply to my lot, because it was somewhat ambiguous. The information they gave me was the diametric opposite of what they later told my architect, which ended up applying to the project. It didn't really affect my project, but drives home that nothing anyone tells you is binding until it's, well, binding, and when dealing with government, one hand often doesn't know what the other is doing.

Here, the issue seems to be that your architect did a ton of work based on an assumption about how the language would be interpreted, without confirming their assumption. That's a problem. If they'd talked to the municipality and gotten the wrong answer, you would still be in a bad place but couldn't really blame them. Here, you can. At the very least, they should be refunding design fees or bearing the cost of whatever process is required to get the plans they designed approved and, if unable to do so, of redesigning the project.

^ yes what Mark described is what we did when we planned to add on to our home, which sat on a corner lot in a historic neighborhood (our architect had managed the variance process several times previously)

I ahve often appealed zoning bylaws but it takes work and knowledge to do so.Sometimes there are ways to do what you want withing the rules for instance maybe the addition can be added differently i do not think this is really anyones "fault" Some rules are just silly and the fihgt could be worth effort.

"Engaging another local architect with more zoning appeals experience may be good."

It may be if there is some bad blood between the players and the second guy is seeking revenge. If they have a good working relationship, refer each other to jobs, etc., he's not going to poison his own well and will do backflips to keep his competitive pal off the hook.

" i do not think this is really anyones "fault""

Patricia, how can you read that this is a mistake that should have been caught by an intern yet still believe no one is at fault please?

I ahve actually started additions and the new rules came in after the permits and had to fight to get my permits allowed not really anyones "fault" but just as much a PITA. Codes change all the time for different reasons different people adding or subtracting rules that siwhy sometimes just not anybody's fault escept the guys making the silly rules .

They told you it was ok to move out even though you did not already have your permit in hand? That seems rather presumptuous and pretentious on the architectural firm's part. Don't let them buffalo you. Obviously, the city was less than impressed with their reputation, and I would wonder if they hadn't hacked someone off at the city.

Variance based on hardship (two streets because it is a corner lot). Meet with the city personnel involved and ask them face to face what you can do. Explore workarounds as chispa described. What city you are located in can play a role in your approval process.

I'll ask again, where is the contractor in all of this?

Having a contractor that is friends with the zoning/permitting department is truly "priceless" specially in difficult towns, like mine was. The last I heard permits were taking 18+ months to get. Who has that time and money to waste in their lives? Only the govt employees do!

All of these problems are local and that makes giving an answer very challenging.

We have a complex system in my city for such things. You can tell a few builders have a friend or give outright bribes. Permits can take 18 months with no variances and following all the rules.

Each round of review - 60 -90 days later can bring a new request. It is mind blowing and I didn't blame our architect entirely (though I can't really know).

Just because some rule seems clear as glass, doesn't mean that it is routinely enforced. Each reviewer is different and there are rules (in some jurisdictions) that are ignored.

Your story sounds terrible and moving out before permits were ready seems like really bad advice.

"They claim that they "learn the code by experience and this is the first time they have encountered this issue" The problem with learning by experience is that you get the test before you get the lesson.

Zoning ordinances are subject to interpretation and the administrator's call can derail a design. The design of any remodeling project begins with an "as-built" survey, a copy of the zoning ordinance, and any applicable architectural covenants in hand. Once basic concept plans are produced, they should be run past the folks in zoning and the architectural review board, if applicable. Waiting until the fully-detailed construction plans are produced risks what happened to the OP. They are paying for their architect's education, and dearly, I suspect.

You haven’t been served well by either your architect or your contractor who both should have warned you that the permitting process is highly variable and can stretch out for months (or even years). I, too, live in an area with strict zoning and a challenging architectural review board. In our city, it is common to need multiple design revisions to get permit approval from the ARB even when zoning rules are strictly followed and variances not needed. Every exterior design element gets picked apart and it is completely subjective. When we added on, our contractor was involved from the beginning and is a very well established local who has been in business for 30 years, lives in the community, isn’t cheap and is booked a year out. His experience was invaluable in the design process—from the outset he told us, point- blank, certain things wouldn’t get approved so don’t waste our time. We followed his advice and still ended up with 2 ARB revisions ( shutters and the size of a side rear window).

The way I go about it, first I work on creating a preliminary addition design with what a customer wants, when I have the exterior layout and dimensions and the rough interior layout is complete I transfer the footprint of the addition onto a copy of the survey, and meet with a zoning officer (especially when dealing with corner lots) to verify that everything is within requirement and there are no restrictions i,e. all setbacks are confirmed, impervious coverage is met, etc from there we finalize all drawings and address any issues if any come up, etc. this way, there are no surprises and no running around back and forth after the plans are submitted for zoning approval and a building permit.

That being said, corner lots always have different requirements this is why is a good idea to meet with a zoning officer and discuss the project beforehand.

Good luck

@Patricia Caldwell, in my community, when new rules come into place after a permit is pulled, it does not affect the permit. One has to work by the rules of the game at the time the game starts. If things change later, that's for later projects. At least that's how it works where I am. Same with selling a house. One can't be expected to go back and bring everything up to current code when a house is changing hands. Everywhere has their own rules.

But for the OP, I agree, the architect is responsible to know codes. That's why you don't hire a draftsman to draw your plans. You hire for expertise by a licensed pro.

@E C I'm curious where you are. There were similar requirements where I lived in Illinois and I've certainly seen them in towns designated as historic districts or with strong ties to history.

I know this is incredibly frustrating, but visual zoning rules like this exist for a reason. I'm sure what you're planning is not an eyesore and I understand that you are not challenging the zoning but I'll just put in my two cents on "silly" zoning ordinances. If one is in an area with a certain visual, especially historical, that adds to the value of the home. I'd be incredibly upset if a neighbor didn't follow the rules and created something that negatively impacted the community I lived in. That said, the architect owes you a full refund IMO.

I don't think the architect owes the OP a full refund. I would expect the architect's firm would do whatever redesign work is required to get the project back on track at no cost to the client. I believe the client should be responsible for zoning and architectural review fees they would otherwise incur.

I suggest the OP request a meeting with their architect and a principal of the firm to express their dissatisfaction and map out a course of action.

I so appreciate the experience and range of insights shared here. It is, at the very least - affirming. One of our primary struggles is loss of confidence. The error itself, while serious - is only as insurmountable as our willingness to correct it. The heart of the issue is trust. The architect's explanations have been so fuzzy, so vague, that it has been incumbent on us to read the code and untangle the violation ourselves.

Fortunately, the language in the code is not difficult to find or understand. But this leads us to suspect that the architect is pulling a hard CYA designed to baffle us into agreement without addressing the underlying cause. Resentment alone is not a good enough reason to jeopardize our dream, we need to come to a conclusion that if we exit it is because going forward would be foolish to the point of absolving their responsibility. Fool me once...

"...the architect is pulling a hard CYA designed to baffle us into agreement without addressing the underlying cause."

I guarantee that's exactly what he's trying to do. If you can pass the cost of your mistakes onto your customers, that's what you do as a businessperson.

If after following the advice of @Charles Ross Homes there is no path for resolution, you can look into the process of filing a complaint with your state's Board of Architecture. Assuming you are in the US, the state issues the license for licensed architects. You may not get anything more than the satisfaction of knowing the architect had to answer to the complaint, but it might put the architect on notice that treating customers in such a way will at the very least, cause them to spend the opportunity cost of what could have been billable hours to a client.

In one jurisdiction where I have had several projects, the Zoning Administrator one day asked me, "Are you ever going to have a project where you do not have to go for a variance?"

I often find the proper designing of a home that best meets the owner's needs and best responds to the site, conflicts with the written word of the document that attempts to control design through blanket directives as if all situations are the same.

“But this leads us to suspect that the architect is pulling a hard CYA designed to baffle us into agreement without addressing the underlying cause. Resentment alone is not a good enough reason to jeopardize our dream, we need to come to a conclusion that if we exit it is because going forward would be foolish to the point of absolving their responsibility.”

So, you are where you are… how you got here and who is responsible for it may largely be immaterial.

You need to find the best way to get from where you are now to where you need to be. That may mean holding the architect responsible and it may mean absolving the architect. Similarly why the mistake was made is only material in determining the likelihood of another mistake. It sucks that this happened but remember it did already happen.

Now you may already know these things and are considering your best way forward, but it never hurts to hear it again.

Good luck with whatever you decide.