lead paint testing

I'm renovating the facades of several old downtown commercial buildings in Central California, is there an obligation to test for lead paint and other hazardous materials? Do I, as the architect, have any liability to the contractor if no testing is done prior to construction?
Original Post
Having done several projects involving "Hazardous" substances....as a GC...we have known to have a testing lab such as Twining or Valley testing do a report with mitigation.
But that is to protect our own rear ends.
Many cities require testing as condition prior to plan approval...most small cities don't.
To answer your question...cover your butt.
Since you are aware and are supposed to be aware of things that effect the general health safety and wellfare of the general public, I would coach you to add to specs as part of a demo plan.
Now, talk about not having a permit (another thread)this one ,I am told , demands jail time.
San Joaquin Air Resources Board can get real nasty.
Not only lead paint, there is asbestos in almost everything 1978 and older.
One such restaurant that I did last year up in Rancho Cordova had 3 dumpsters of fryable material in it.
Floors,Ceiling tiles ,sprayed ceilings, gyp board tape and mud,insulation and built up roofing.
The testing and report ran around $5000.
Clean up was $22,000 on a 5000 s.f. building.
As far as quoting from CBC...I leave that to the smart people here on this forum.
Just had a beer with a building inspector buddy.
His comment..."you know that "hazardous Materials " form that you fill out before we issue a permit...has all that info in it and that is why you(contractor) and owner must sign it".
So, I think what he is saying is that owner and contractor take responsibility.
BUT...who has the deepest pockets?
Likes (0)