1. Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by clicking here: Upgrades
    Dismiss Notice

Designer of plans that seeks a license

Discussion in 'Building Designers' started by tmtpermits, Apr 29, 2015.

  1. RickAstoria

    RickAstoria -------------------

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    7
    You're not practicing architecture unless you are designing a project. So what's the point. If you are not doing anything, you pretty much would not have any legal right to sue as you are not a party to the case matter. You are non-existent and irrelevant as far as the court is concerned. If you are in contract then you would have legal status. Even then, the judges of a court in cases of tort or negligence is going to take your background into consideration. It would be part of the facts brought before a case. It is going to be because your client's attorney will point out things like education, certification, etc. as prima facie evidence to support their argument in a case.
     
  2. mark handler

    mark handler Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,410
    Likes Received:
    801
    I disagree with you definition of an Architect.

    But, per your definition, I am an Architect. I do have three project "on the boards".

    By my definition, and the states I am licensed in, I am an Architect until I give up my license.

    Per the internet:

    An architect is a person who plans, designs, and oversees the construction of buildings. To practice architecture means to provide services in connection with the design and construction of buildings and the space within the site surrounding the buildings, that have as their principal purpose human occupancy or use.

    As you see there is more than"designing" a project.
     
  3. RickAstoria

    RickAstoria -------------------

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    7
    Yeah. I do just that as well. Building designers also do: make plans, designs, and oversees the construction of buildings.

    To practice building design means to provide services in connection with the design and construction of buildings and the space within the site surrounding the buildings, that have as their principal purpose human occupancy or use.

    Considering we also do landscape design as well as it is lapping domain. I do that. In Oregon, that is entirely legal for me to do. So am I an 'architect' by that definition or the historically correct definition which you find in an old dictionary from before say... 1890s when Illinois adopted licensing.

    Personally, you can be licensed authorizing you to practice architecture and to market as such but if you literally don't do anything, you are not practicing architecture. Just having a license doesn't mean you are practicing the profession. That's my point. You are only really an architect when you engage the activity of the practice of architecture. If you don't doing anything, you're not really practicing as one and therefore not engaged in the role of an architect. Architect title only applies to you and what you do when you are engaged in the role of architect.

    Otherwise, you are wasting money on a piece of paper with a number on it.

    I'm getting past the licensing law right to the law of reality.

    I'm sure if we continue debating along this line we would be losing track of the original discussion.
     
    #43 RickAstoria, Oct 31, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 31, 2015
  4. mark handler

    mark handler Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,410
    Likes Received:
    801
    No he is an Unlicensed person looking for a license, you are saying he can get "certified" and I am saying It does not matter; It still is not a license.
     
  5. RickAstoria

    RickAstoria -------------------

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    7
    That's fine but why bother getting a license. If the guy has a successful construction business it will mean he will commit business suicide. There is no way that a person can sustain a construction company, being active and go through the architectural licensing process. It will kill his revenue. It will put him financially in debt in loans. You just can't do both full-time. Architecture school requires overtime commitment to pass at a grade level they demand. You been there... right? If you aren't enrolled by the age 25, you might as well forget architecture through a degree path. Architecture school is for fresh out of high school kids. It's geared that way with so much demand on time.

    If you are trying to run a business, you just can't commit the time needed to be successful doing both. You can either do terrible in the business and do well in class or you fail in the school and do well in the business. There is just not enough hours in a week to do it.

    Certification is more achievable and it will simply aid defending ones competence to a building official who will take consideration of a person's background. Some building officials who don't know a person will be eager to have that person have their plans prepared by an architect or engineer but even a certified building designer is probably enough to calm the concerns of a building official.

    A building official mainly wants well prepared plans submitted. The process of certifications like licensing will normally aid in that process. Add to that, codes may at some point further recognize certified design professionals.

    If we want to reign in and curb incompetence in the domain of unlicensed realm then we need to recognize certifications as it is a process which its purpose is to encourage professional development in the process of certification and afterwards.

    If the builder wants to pursue architectural license, the builder should prepare to close his/her business. Add to that, architects are not interested in being partners unless they are in complete charge and keep majority of the money. Additionally, most architectural firms do not allow employees (interns) to moonlight. That is to have their own business. If they find out, the intern is fired/laid off.

    That is why I suggest to forget pursuing the architect license if he has a successful business. It just doesn't work because architects aren't the kind of cats to be subordinate to others.
     
  6. mark handler

    mark handler Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,410
    Likes Received:
    801
    You want the party line:

    Hiring an architect saves time and money, minimize bumps, streamline the building process, and provide an accurate picture of how the project will turn out before a single nail has been driven.

    http://www.aiacc.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Client-Best-Practices-5.pdf

    I've been in the buisness for thirty five years. I've worked for the good and bad.

    Some So called "licensed"Architects don't know how a building goes together, nor what a code book is.

    But as a Building official; 90 percent of the problems i've seen on the plans and in construction were by Unlicensed Designers and draftsmen.
     
  7. mark handler

    mark handler Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,410
    Likes Received:
    801
  8. RickAstoria

    RickAstoria -------------------

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    7
    90% of that is coming from home owners doing their own work and moonlighting interns and so forth before they have any experience. Lets keep in mind that there is probably 9 to 10 interns and drafters (some fresh out of college) with less than 5 years of education/experience. Remember, builders often grabs cheap students taking a 1 year or 2 year degree in drafting and those just freshly graduated because those with experience or even certifications would cost them more than what they want to spend. There are a lot of them. A lot more than there are architects. There are more architects than there are CPBDs.

    Then you have the DIYers doing their own plans which is quite a bit. Even builders who are good at construction are horrible in preparing plans because they have no training in designing. They don't have architectural education or full-time experience designing buildings so they aren't necessarily the same quality.

    Sure, the party line is nothing new to me. Certified professional building designers will do the same thing (usually). They'll often save the client time and money, minimize bumps, streamline the building process and provide an accurate picture of how the project will turn out before a single nail has been driven to a practical extent.... yes that is moderately true for both as no one is perfect.

    The point to encourage unlicensed designers to undergo certification as one option in addition to options like licensure is so they can learn what they don't know because until they are revealed to the matters when undergoing certification examination, it serves to make them better designers.

    A certification is better than no certification in many cases. Not everyone can pursue licensing as an architect because the process is too damn expensive and firms these days tends to not be flexible for people who are builders for example. Architecture school isn't. Firms tends to hire only those who graduate from an NAAB accredited school. For many of us, we have to learn this through autodidactic learning methods. I been in the study and business for a decade plus some years.

    I don't see the path as financially viable. Do you really foresee tmtpermits willing to shut down his/her business for like 10 years to get through licensing as architecture school will not provide any credit for construction experience at all. Then there is IDP. I just don't see that being realistic.

    Whereas, the person may develop experience as a building designer in construction and working under supervision of an architect or engineer and get through certification. It can help as a business to market as well as the process of certification can help improve the person as a building design professional and with certification includes continuing education which is career long learning and improving. This is something that you should encourage those who it is unrealistic that they will become licensed as an architect. In addition, certified designers tends to be of higher calibre than the run of the mill.
     
  9. mark handler

    mark handler Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,410
    Likes Received:
    801
    Others do.

    it's like going to a doctor instead of a Nurse practitioner

    Some doctors know nothing; Some architect know nothing.

    Education and training; Many times they look at things from different perspectives.
     
  10. RickAstoria

    RickAstoria -------------------

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    7
    I've read that as with the same basic guide that is issued out in every state.

    Just that Architects aren't the only ones that can provide good design. If architectural licensing path is a viable path for everyone in the design profession of the built environment, I would encourage it more but it isn't but there are alternative options that are viable.
     
  11. mark handler

    mark handler Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,410
    Likes Received:
    801
    No Most are so called "building or residental designers" or contractors
     
  12. mark handler

    mark handler Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,410
    Likes Received:
    801
    Rick there are very competent Building designers with the necessary abilities, knowledge, and skills to surpass those of many licened Architects.

    But that is not the Law.
     
  13. RickAstoria

    RickAstoria -------------------

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    7
    However, that analogy doesn't always hold in our profession. Considering nearly everything that is taught in school and generally in mentoring is the public knowledge. There is some stuff we all learn from actually doing but much of that is soft skills that we can't just learn by book but by practice.

    An architect and a building designer with 35 years experience with comparable projects are going to be relatively comparable in knowledge and experience. A building designer in the residential field can be comparable in knowledge and skills (education and training) as an architect. That is because the process of licensure or examination is not the end of learning. In the larger scheme of a career, taking an exam is only a small portion of one's life.
     
  14. mark handler

    mark handler Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,410
    Likes Received:
    801
    Rick

    There are many projects that are NOT residental, residental is only a small portion of an Architects practice/life
     
  15. RickAstoria

    RickAstoria -------------------

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    7
    But laws are not static. We get to define the law. Nice thing about being citizens. That's a right of ours. The law can be looked at in two perspectives, not just what we can't do but what we can do.

    When something is not restricted, it is considered allowed. The law like the codes are shaped by us through our involvement with ICC and at our building code divisions as they are adopted and amended.
     
  16. RickAstoria

    RickAstoria -------------------

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    7
    Yes, but residential isn't always the only kinds of projects a building designer may design as we may practice not just in one state but other states where the exemptions maybe allow more kinds of projects. In Oregon, I may design light commercial buildings under a certain size but if I do a project in... oh... Oklahoma, I can do many projects that are non-exempt if the project was in Oregon but perfectly exempt. What I am allowed to design depends on the varying exemptions.

    I focus on residential more in the case of California but in other states, what is allowed to be design isn't just residential.
     
  17. mark handler

    mark handler Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,410
    Likes Received:
    801
    Good luck with that.
     
  18. RickAstoria

    RickAstoria -------------------

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    7
    Even then, it really doesn't matter because one thing that matters above everything and all the stuff about the laws is doing good work. For essentially the life of Cliff May, he never really let the licensing get in the way of making a successful career designing buildings.
     
  19. mark handler

    mark handler Sawhorse

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    10,410
    Likes Received:
    801
    Not true

    CALIFORNIA ARCHITECTS BOARD

    Licensee Name: MAY, CLIFF

    License Type: ARCHITECT

    License Number: C16730

    License Status: DECEASED

    Expiration Date: August 31, 1991

    Issue Date: January 01, 1986

    Address: 13151 SUNSET BLVD

    City: LOS ANGELES

    State: CA

    Zip: 90049

    County: LOS ANGELES

    Actions: No

    For those that don't know

    Cliff May was an architect practicing in California best known and remembered for developing the suburban Post-war "dream home" — the California Ranch House.

    He with 300 other designers took advantage of the Elimination of the RBD PROGRAM
     
    #59 mark handler, Nov 1, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 1, 2015
  20. RickAstoria

    RickAstoria -------------------

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2009
    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    7
    That was because they grandfathered him in. It was what... 1986 when they issued it. By then, he was already semi-retired. He had got registered as a registered building designer but for most of his career, license as an architect was not really something that mattered.

    You might want to take a closer look at his background.

    I said he never let the licensing get in the way of making a successful career in building design. Simply put, he was already successful LONG before that time. He was already becoming a successful building designer in the 1930s and 1940s and with the G.I. Bill and the 1950s and the housing boom, he was successful. In the course of his career, he became a registered building designer when that program came into existence but when CAB was sunsetting it, they intentionally grandfathered him.

    Throughout his regular practicing career, he was never licensed as an architect.

    There was a time where in California that building designers did have a registration. I don't recall exactly the regulation of the registered building designer program but when they were doing away with it in California, CAB made sure he was grandfathered in. It was probably more CAB and the people who were in charge and the respect he had garnered over the decades. He wasn't licensed until damn near his death. So it really had no real bearing on his career.
     

Share This Page