Architectual warning

[falconfieldserv]

Wow ..very long thread with lots of passion. My 2 cents about licensed architects:

I believe that all the training towards a degree , aprenticeship and the test is a waste of time and money if they design something that cant be built. I believe that the training and eduction requirements should include 2 years in the field building something that was proposed by other licensed architects ( I do not mean project management .I mean wearing a carpenters apron pounding nails, raising walls, forming concrete, using a transit, and what ever it takes to put together the building as drawn.

I also take issue with the licensed professionals who design without knowing the cost to build.

I am currently working with a homeowner who was told by an architect that the additions to his house would cost around 145k.

We line item bid the project for 422k. Should the architect pay the difference? The homeowner is very disappointed. We are at 200 per square foot with the architect being 80 per sq foot.

Isnt the act of licensing by the government supposed to protect the consumer by insuring that the duly licensed architect meets stringent minimum requirements?

[RMorrison]

falconfieldserv:

I absolutely agree that architects need to get out in the field more to see the realities of construction. Do they need to wear a toolbelt? Hmm, I suppose I could make the converse argument that licensed general contractors should be required to spend a couple of years in an architect's office drawing plans and reading code books so they know how to read plans well.

I'm not sure that being able to personally frame a hog valley or calculate the length of a jack rafter is critical for an architect. Being respectful of what the builder brings to the table (i.e. supposedly knowing how to build) is, however. In the ideal world, architects and contractors would bring their own separate talents together, and recognize that they are complementary. If I could do EVERYTHING a general contractor could do, I wouldn't need GCs.

The mistake your architect made was not getting you involved earlier for pricing information. I would think that the architect has an ethical obligation to redesign the project to approximately meet the client's stated budget (if it WAS stated).

Licensure of architects does not guarantee competency, any more than licensure of contractors guarantees that they know how to build. (And in almost 30 years of doing this, I've seen plenty of contractors who didn't.)

[falconfieldserv]

I agree with the converse agrument that gcs/framers need to read plans alot better. I for one have taken plan reading 1 and 2 at a local college night class. It was very informative as to what makes a good plan.

The architect, the homeowner,my estimator and myself will be getting together next week to bridge the gap between the budget and the real cost of the proposed work.

We hope to make this homeowner's dream addition a reality in a reincarnated form. We hope that the architect wil be open to the price model we have built and the tweaking we propose to make it a reality for the homeowner.

[falconfieldserv]

I agree with the converse agrument that gcs/framers need to read plans alot better. I for one have taken plan reading 1 and 2 at a local college night class. It was very informative as to what makes a good plan.

The architect, the homeowner,my estimator and myself will be getting together next week to bridge the gap between the budget and the real cost of the proposed work.

We hope to make this homeowner's dream addition a reality in a reincarnated form. We hope that the architect wil be open to the price model we have built and the tweaking we propose to make it a reality for the homeowner.

[jwrjr]

Regarding the architects bid vs the builders bid, there are always HUGE gaps from one person to the next in the bid process. We bid jobs that have good money in them against other guys whose price is $30,000 more. It doesn't need to be said that that guys profit margins are up in the stratosphere. My point is, your 422k could be someone elses 145k. (I don't mean your particular case, I'm just using your numbers to make a point). It all depends on those profit margins and what someone feels there work/time is worth; not necessarily the actual, realistic cost for a job.

Simply put, no 2 bids are alike and can vary greatly. Thus one would say the other doesn't know what he is doing. When in reality, one is just trying to gouge the client so he can spend the summer in Hawaii; knowing exactly what he is doing. It's not always the lower bidder that should be watched.

Again, not you so please don't send a nasty reply. Its just a point being made.

[VIVUS Architect]

Thought I'd throw this into the mix:

This is not an invitation, but: Just like a doctor can be sued for malpractise, so can I.

As a licensed architect, my personal assests are on the line whether I work for myself or for someone else.

As far as I'm told, I can't hide behind a company or corporation.

Not sure that the same can be said for non-licensed designers.

These are pretty high stakes, for which I carry professional liability insurance, for which I must charge my clients, so my fees need to be higher.

Ah, the joys of being licensed!

Carrying a license does show that I'm willing to expose myself personally to litigation, that I meet state requirements, that I've devoted a substantial amount of my life (and money) educating myself for the job, and that I am continuing to educate myself per state and professional association requirements.

Does that merit rights to a word? Probably. Like medical doctor, professional engineer or certified public accountant.

Would you feel mislead if your doctor turned out to be unlicensed? Gulp. Maybe that guy with a scalpel really meets minimum requirements to cut me open, but maybe not!

History showed the necessity for licensing doctors and architects, or we wouldn't have licenses. Since we have them, it makes sense to maintain their clarity, hence the fussing with the word.


For the record I've seen the word "designer" stretched way beyond reasonable limits, too.

[VIVUS Architect]

This is a difficult topic.

I agree that 80 versus 200 per foot is extreme.

Could you tell me what another contractor would charge to build a project? Probably in very general terms, but not very accurately.

You can't know all the variables involved. Which crews are available, does he have good relationships with suppliers, does he get volume discounts, are his subs reputable, does he have experience with this type of project and its requirements, what is his overall profit goal, do his kids need braces?

Does the client want to pay for a complete estimate based on national averages (RS Means, etc the only accessible resource) factored for local variation? Great, if so. But even then, should the architect be liable for variations between estimate and bid? Does the architect have control over either the national averages or the contractors? Insurance companies are in the business of covering things they cannot control, and we all know they charge for it!

To try to solve this dillema, we've invited contractors into the project team very early. As soon as the concept is developed, we get a cost based on drawings and a written narrative describing the scope of work. Then we design some more, then get another cost, right from the guy holding the cost reins. Then, finally, after the client's approval, we finish up the construction documents and they go out for bidding.

Even with this sort of contractor involvement, we've seen projects come in 75% higher than the contractor estimates, which is enough to kill a project. By this time, the architect's fee is eaten up and the Owner can't swing the project, and many times it dies.

The long and the short of this is that we need to find better ways to collaborate in guide both design and costs to successful completion.

I'd be happy to hear any suggestions for improving this good, but not foolproof, process.

[falconfieldserv]

Many variables are involved. Most are related to the location of the project to an inground pool. The installation of the full basement within 10' of the pool required sheet piling. The house needs to be under pinned because its a slab on grade. The homeowner wanted the full basement . The soil conditions are sandy. Not to mention the 38' long steel beam 16" deep placed 2.5 stories in the air for a great room with cathedrial ceilings.

Sheet piling...........................................2 5k gc cost
foundation with under pinning..............60k gc cost
Steel installation...................................25k gc cost

Architects estimate .....................................145k for project..............................pricless

I do not think 30k will consruct 1100 sq feet of addition and 700 feet of remodel.

My point being that the three items I described are major components in this proposed projects. While we are able to know everything 3 phone calls would have told him that his number was way off.

He didnt have a basic handle on the unique factors of this project yet took 5k to design it and told the homeowner that 145k would build it.

My estimator took 8 hours maximum to prepare this bid. We use WinestPro ( www.winest.com ) . we made some phone calls to our various contacts for the unique items on the scope of work.
The database that we use in winestpro is the rsmeans residential database.

My point here is an architect can provide a price model based on means with location modifiers. This estimate cost me $500.00 to produce.

Isn't it possible for an architect to hire a sub to produce a line item estimate based on means and a few phone calls. He would probably see more of his projects built which might mean more income to him if he charges to interface between the homeowner and the contractor.

People spend 500.00 all the time on items that do not even have the potential to produce revenue.

[dwmosman]

This is not an invitation... Heh, good one!

Vivus, as I read the comments here, most people respect the effort required to be a licensed architect and don't want to confused with one.

The dilemma for them (& me) is to be able to define what they do (vs. an architect, an interior designer, a general contractor, a draftsperson, etc.). And probably the most contentious word is "architectural", i.e., of architecture.

When one designs the shape of a home, and then creates the drawings necessary to build it, what is that called? What simple statement can be used so that potential customers can say "Ah, This person is not claiming to have the broad background of an architect who can design and then build all manner of commercial and residential buildings using any material whatsoever. This person is offering to work with me to design my home according to generally accepted practices and materials and then create the drawings necessary to hand over to a general contractor who will take the responsibility of doing the building.

When anyone seems to be able to advertise architectural shingles, architectural windows, architectural moldings, etc. without complaint from architectural boards, it is sometimes confusing to people who create architectural drawings as to why they can't say that they do.

I'm not sure of the answer to the issue. I think people should know when they are working with an architect and when they aren't.

Of course, in the hospital, it might be nice to know when I was being checked by a doctor and when it was just an intern who wanted to practice giving shots

[AdamF]

Originally posted by dwmosman

Of course, in the hospital, it might be nice to know when I was being checked by a doctor and when it was just an intern who wanted to practice giving shots

Very good.

Recently, I had a conversation with someone that works in hospital administration. She said that we should all remember that exactly one half of doctors graduate in the top half of their class and the other half graduated in the bottom half. An amusing way to put it I thought. We also agreed that what you learn after graduation is even more important and we have almost no way to ascertain any of this.

Draw your own conclusions.

Cheers,

AF

[mcqueenhomes]

VIVUS,

While I highly respect the skills and knowledge of architects (which I do not have) . . .

"History showed the necessity for licensing doctors and architects, or we wouldn't have licenses. Since we have them, it makes sense to maintain their clarity, hence the fussing with the word."

. . . to me History has shown that any government, if allowed to exist long enough, will begin to license, regulate, and tax the living crap out of everything in sight.

So if licensed Architects can assist in helping the government tell us what we can't do, why can you not help them tell us what we can do? You want the ball, so I'll give it to you: What word can we use for our jobs, and our product?

A philosphical person at work told me there are two rules in life: "I can, so you can't" and "I can't, so you can't". I hate it when he's right about that.

[mthd]

IN REPLY TO RICHARD

THANKS FOR YOUR COMENTS, THE POINT OF MY DEFINITIONS WERE IN HARMONY WITH WHAT I WAS TAUGHT IN AUSTRALIA BY AN ARCHITECT (INFACT ALL MY LECTURERS WERE ARCHITECTS) THEY HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH US BEING CALLED ARCHITECTUAL DRAFTSPERSONS OR TECHNICIANS. WHILE ENROLLED IN THE COURSE TITLE "DIPLOMA IN ARCHITECTURAL TECHNOLOGY" A TITLE THAT APPEARS TO BE O.K. IN STATE OF NEW SOUTH WALES. MANY PEOPLE WHO COMPLETE THIS COURSE ARE VERY USEFULL TO ARCHITECTURAL PRACTICES IN THIS STATE.

PREVIOUSLY IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA A SIMILAR COURSE WAS CALLED "DIPLOMA IN ARCHITECTURAL DRAFTING" ANDS ITS LOWER COURSE FOR LOW RISE CONSTUCTION WAS CALLED ''ADVANCED CERTIFICATE IN ARCHITECTURAL DRAFTING". BUT DUE TO THE "ARCHITECTURAL" DEBATE IN SOUTH AUSTRALIA IT APPEARS THAT THOSE COUSES HAVE CHANGED THEIR NAMES TO "CERTIFICATE 4 IN RESIDENTIAL DRAFTING" AND "DIPLOMA OF BUILDING DESIGN & TECHNOLOGY" MEDIUM TO HIGH RISE CONSTRUCTION.YET THOSE COURSES IN N.S.W. ARE AUSTRALIA WIDE RECOGNISED COURSES.

IN NEW SOUTH WALES THE PREMIER (OR GOVENOR AS YOU CALL IT) LIMITS US (BUILDING DESIGNERS) TO NO HIGHER THAN 4 STORIES, ANYTHING ABOVE THAT NEEDS A CHARTERED ARCHITECT.

BUT HERE IN NEW SOUTH WALES THE ARCHITECTS DONT KICK UP ABOUT US BEING CALLED ARCHITECTURAL DRAFTSPERSONS OR TECHNICIANS, YET. BUT OUR MAIN ARCHITECT LECTURER SAID THAT PEOPLE FROM N.S.W. COURSE (2 YEAR) ARE MORE QUALIFIED & USEFULL TO ARCHITECTS THAN 6 YEAR ARCHITECT DEGREE STUDENT WHO CANT DRAW A CONSTRUCTION DETAIL PROPERLY, THEY SEEM TO BE TAUGHT THE ARTITISTIC SIDE OF THINGS MORE THAN THE PRACTICLAL THINGS. AN AS ONE OLD RETIRED ARCHITECT LECTURER SAID THEY NEED TO SHUT UP ABOUT THE DESIGN UNTIL THEY RISE IN THE RANKS, AFTER BEING EXPLOITED BY THE THE CHIEF ARCHITECTS FOR YEARS AND PAYING NO EXTRA MONEY FOR THEIR OVERTIME. YES YOU ARCHITECTS HAVE BEEN EXPLOITED A THING THAT IS NOT ETHICAL YET ARCHITECTS THINK ITS THIER RIGHT TO MAKE THEM WORK OVERTIME SINCE THEY ARE IN THE PRESENCE OF THE "DEITY ARCHITECHT", YOU NAME THE FAMOUS ARCHITECTS THAT DID THIS.

BUT REMEMBER FRANK LOYD WRIGHT WHO SAW THE LIGHT (MOONLIGHT) GOT OUT FROM HIS MASTER AND EXPLOITED OTHERS AS HE DEIFIED HIMSELF AS WELL.(A THING THAT I DISAGREE WITH AND WOULD NOT DO TO OTHERS) LETS FACE IT NOT ALL ARCHIECTS WILL EXPLOIT OTHERS. I FOR ONE WOULD NOT EXPLOIT OTHERS OR WORK FOR THOSE WHO EXPLOITED ME.

REGARDS TO ALL (BUILDING DESIGNERS) & ARCHITECTS WHO EMPLOY CHIEF ARCHITECT AS THIER TECHNICIAN.YES THE OLD STORY OF THE SLAVE BECOMING THE MASTER. ITS IRONIC THAT CHIEF ARCHITECT HAS BECOME OUR SLAVE THAT WE PAY WELL.

[VIVUS Architect]

In response to Jason:

You're free to use whatever words you want, knowing the potential consequences this thread points out. There have been lots of suggestions for words you could use. I've none better to offer.

If "architect" is that important, jump the hoops to get licensed. Then you won't have to worry.

Or maybe you could lobby to force architects to use the word "licensed" or "registered" and everyone else could be "unlicensed".

[dgavin]

Design-Build

I design it and I have to build it for the cost I give in the proposal.
I also have to get a realistic budget before I start designing. I often
spend more effort trying to keep the price down then the homeowner
because I know it always costs more than they want to spend. I also want the job so it makes sense for me to keep it in there budget. If they don't give me a budget I give them one.

Dennis Gavin CR, CKBR
Gavin Design-Build

[mcqueenhomes]

I would expect to get sued for calling myself an "architect". I like the term "drafting" or other sort of "technician" label just fine. I service Architects and Professional Building Designers (another specific term used by AIBD I suppose I should avoid), not necessarily replace them.

I don't disagree that doctors, layers, and architects should be qualified and credentialed, but anymore I would not believe for a picosecond that a government required license was truly implemented ultimately due to a historical lesson, or to serve anyone but the government itself. With as many quacky doctors as I've seen and heard about, it is apparent the "license" did little to no good to me or my relatives.

What I do have a problem with is being sued for producing "'architectural' renderings" and since I do very unfortuantely live in Oregon it would appear to be a potential problem. Even if I only claim to be an "Independent Home Design Services Technician".

I wonder what they do in Washington state, because when I was in high school there the class I took was called "Architectural Drawing." Has anyone sued the local high school? Gosh, I hope not.