I've been asking this question around the professions quite a bit, and I always seem to get different answers...
But with design-build contractors, or just licensed contractors in general, as what level of size does the project require the licensed stamp from an architect and or engineer? Can a contractor technically draft the plans himself? I'm guessing the size of the project has a lot to do with it, and also what is deemed by the state, location... But is there an official source for this kind information??
I know contractors can do additions, remodels, landscapes, etc...., but just at what level does they need an architect/engineer to approve their designs? I've heard things to the extent that contractors can build buildings up to a certain height, is this true? And what about buildings other than residential zoning, like say... a business building?
You basically answered your own question. The official answer varies from locality and is generally clearly indicated on the jurisdiction's building department website. If not you can call the number and ask. There is no all encompassing answer as every state and most cities/counties vary substantially.
Unless your construction job comes down to getting carpets replaced by empiretoday.com, you need a good architect to protect your interests for any significant construction job. Especially if you have zero construction experience.
Design-Build is a delivery method where architectural services are either in house or contracted out. But this model should really only be used by clients who understand what the hell they are doing.
Aug 2, 17 6:28 pm ·
·
samueltomg
Where would that put a general contractor with an in-house, unlicensed draftsman? They might be able to draft the plans, details, etc. but they would likely contract, (send) those drawings out to get looked over and stamped? Is this how many contractors work?
Aug 2, 17 6:47 pm ·
·
Rusty!
It doesn't sound like this GC does work that requires stamped drawings. You are beating around the bush here. What is the scope of work you are trying to do? If you are replacing a roof or remodeling a kitchen, no you don't need an Architect. Your GC will do the permitting process for you. Anything that you see on HGTV. Go with contractor. But if you are adding an entire story to your house or building a sufficiently complex structure, architectural services are there for your benefit. Honest.
Aug 2, 17 6:53 pm ·
·
samueltomg
Thanks Rusty! Yeah I'm a little perplexed over this issue because I knew of a GC who did full on additions (raised however, with no concrete pad... come to think of it), and once even a full house or two in his portfolio, but no, he wasn't an architect or engineer. I guess he sent his drawings to a trusted architect somewhere.
Aug 2, 17 7:42 pm ·
·
s=r*(theta)
there is a HUGE difference between drafting and designing, a 5yr old can take the mouse and draw lines in autocad, will you end up with a c/o? highly doubt it
It's possible that GC in question did work on bigger full house projects, but perhaps they were not a primary contract. They might even have been a subcontractor. You still include it in your portfolio and then oversell it.
edit: I am too dumb to know how to respond to in line sub comment, and there is no way to delete this comment. So here we are.
Depends on who you ask, duh. I'd say you always need an architect for everything and pay them fair but generous, from deciding what coffee to drink to what music to listen to (answers: drink black filter coffee and listen to this , send me your bitcoins via email)
A contractor will give you generally the cheapest nastiest tackiest design they can get away with, an architect will give you quality and value usually. There are very good contractors and there are very bad architects, so there is some overlap but you are taking a big risk with using only a contractor that things wont turn out very well. Using an architect provides protection against something going wrong. But you have to pay extra for that.
Aug 3, 17 7:08 am ·
·
samueltomg
Not so sure... I think you might be doubting the hands on skills of a contractor/builders, since I've heard that 90% of buildings in the world were actually not designed/built by architects.
Probably lots of vernacular structures, but gems nonetheless.
Aug 3, 17 11:30 am ·
·
wurdan freo
Using an architect provides protection against something going wrong... that's a loaded statement...
There was an article about a modern home built in upstate New York by a famous architect in the 1970s. It was all angles and glass and started leaking even before the owners moved in. Maintenance was a nightmare. The thing sat empty for about 20 years before it was scheduled to demolished as an eyesore, there was no demand for the lot. Before it was demolished a group of architectural historians asked a contractor about restoring the house. He evaluated it and said the structure was so far gone it would be cheaper to tear it down and rebuild a new house from the original plans if they wanted historical accuracy. But, he said, the new house would start falling apart immediately also unless drastic changes were made to the plans and he advised against it. So much for contractors not having any integrity.
Aug 3, 17 8:06 am ·
·
s=r*(theta)
#BuildersLivesMatter
Aug 3, 17 8:37 am ·
·
Nats
Rebuilding it would be far more expensive than retaining it of course, so he would get more money if they followed his advice. It would also probably be far easier rebuilding from scratch that trying to remedy an unusual construction that he would probably know nothing about. Not everyone appreciates modern architecture and as with anything unusual sometimes it goes wrong. A contractor will almost always build a rectangular brick building with a pitched roof. And most contractors will actually go to architects themselves for a design if they are employed on a design and build basis, unless they have an in house designer.
Aug 3, 17 10:15 am ·
·
Volunteer
What part of "the fucking thing was a train wreck from the day it was built" do you not understand?
Aug 3, 17 10:18 am ·
·
Nats
Who would you rather have a car from Lada or Ferrari?
Aug 3, 17 10:33 am ·
·
randomised
Easy! Sell the Ferrari, get my driver's license and drive the Lada.
In most states anyone can design sf homes. Some states allow quite a bit more. It's a state law issue. I would advise hiring a designer (architect of designer) for any scenario that involves design or re-design of a space. Contractors will 99% of the time provide whatever is most profitable for them. I do landscape design for mostly high end sfr. I've done many projects for typical middle class homes as well. Despite the size of the project, a thoughtful design always yields a better result. I am always perplexed how some people will hand contractors 100k without even seeing anything more than a shitty half baked concept plan. For owners a Designers main value is in 3 main things
1. To Maximize the effectiveness, value, and efficiency of the project/spaces through a thoughtful and informed process. (Good design)
2. To remove the mystery of the end result prior to construction.
3. To provide contractually binding drawings and documents between owner and builder.
Design-Build is a contract structure... ALDB is where architects also act as contractors. In many states, a GC licence/stamp is required when you are constructing for someone else. This varies by state. If you build for yourself, you may not require a GC license. Check your local laws.
At what point do you ACTUALLY require an architect vs a contractor?
I've been asking this question around the professions quite a bit, and I always seem to get different answers...
But with design-build contractors, or just licensed contractors in general, as what level of size does the project require the licensed stamp from an architect and or engineer? Can a contractor technically draft the plans himself? I'm guessing the size of the project has a lot to do with it, and also what is deemed by the state, location... But is there an official source for this kind information??
I know contractors can do additions, remodels, landscapes, etc...., but just at what level does they need an architect/engineer to approve their designs? I've heard things to the extent that contractors can build buildings up to a certain height, is this true? And what about buildings other than residential zoning, like say... a business building?
Unless your construction job comes down to getting carpets replaced by empiretoday.com, you need a good architect to protect your interests for any significant construction job. Especially if you have zero construction experience.
Design-Build is a delivery method where architectural services are either in house or contracted out. But this model should really only be used by clients who understand what the hell they are doing.
Where would that put a general contractor with an in-house, unlicensed draftsman? They might be able to draft the plans, details, etc. but they would likely contract, (send) those drawings out to get looked over and stamped? Is this how many contractors work?
It doesn't sound like this GC does work that requires stamped drawings. You are beating around the bush here. What is the scope of work you are trying to do? If you are replacing a roof or remodeling a kitchen, no you don't need an Architect. Your GC will do the permitting process for you. Anything that you see on HGTV. Go with contractor. But if you are adding an entire story to your house or building a sufficiently complex structure, architectural services are there for your benefit. Honest.
Thanks Rusty! Yeah I'm a little perplexed over this issue because I knew of a GC who did full on additions (raised however, with no concrete pad... come to think of it), and once even a full house or two in his portfolio, but no, he wasn't an architect or engineer. I guess he sent his drawings to a trusted architect somewhere.
there is a HUGE difference between drafting and designing, a 5yr old can take the mouse and draw lines in autocad, will you end up with a c/o? highly doubt it
It's possible that GC in question did work on bigger full house projects, but perhaps they were not a primary contract. They might even have been a subcontractor. You still include it in your portfolio and then oversell it.
edit: I am too dumb to know how to respond to in line sub comment, and there is no way to delete this comment. So here we are.
Depends on who you ask, duh. I'd say you always need an architect for everything and pay them fair but generous, from deciding what coffee to drink to what music to listen to (answers: drink black filter coffee and listen to this , send me your bitcoins via email)
So...basically, an intern?
Nice to see Rusty back!
A contractor will give you generally the cheapest nastiest tackiest design they can get away with, an architect will give you quality and value usually. There are very good contractors and there are very bad architects, so there is some overlap but you are taking a big risk with using only a contractor that things wont turn out very well. Using an architect provides protection against something going wrong. But you have to pay extra for that.
Not so sure... I think you might be doubting the hands on skills of a contractor/builders, since I've heard that 90% of buildings in the world were actually not designed/built by architects. Probably lots of vernacular structures, but gems nonetheless.
Using an architect provides protection against something going wrong... that's a loaded statement...
There was an article about a modern home built in upstate New York by a famous architect in the 1970s. It was all angles and glass and started leaking even before the owners moved in. Maintenance was a nightmare. The thing sat empty for about 20 years before it was scheduled to demolished as an eyesore, there was no demand for the lot. Before it was demolished a group of architectural historians asked a contractor about restoring the house. He evaluated it and said the structure was so far gone it would be cheaper to tear it down and rebuild a new house from the original plans if they wanted historical accuracy. But, he said, the new house would start falling apart immediately also unless drastic changes were made to the plans and he advised against it. So much for contractors not having any integrity.
#BuildersLivesMatter
Rebuilding it would be far more expensive than retaining it of course, so he would get more money if they followed his advice. It would also probably be far easier rebuilding from scratch that trying to remedy an unusual construction that he would probably know nothing about. Not everyone appreciates modern architecture and as with anything unusual sometimes it goes wrong. A contractor will almost always build a rectangular brick building with a pitched roof. And most contractors will actually go to architects themselves for a design if they are employed on a design and build basis, unless they have an in house designer.
What part of "the fucking thing was a train wreck from the day it was built" do you not understand?
Who would you rather have a car from Lada or Ferrari?
Easy! Sell the Ferrari, get my driver's license and drive the Lada.
In California,
Anyone can do wood framed single family two stories and basement in height.
Up to four units same scenario as above.
Detached garage, same scenario as above.
Agriculture and ranch buildings.
Non structural storefronts or interior remodels not involving structural or life safety implications.
In most states anyone can design sf homes. Some states allow quite a bit more. It's a state law issue. I would advise hiring a designer (architect of designer) for any scenario that involves design or re-design of a space. Contractors will 99% of the time provide whatever is most profitable for them. I do landscape design for mostly high end sfr. I've done many projects for typical middle class homes as well. Despite the size of the project, a thoughtful design always yields a better result. I am always perplexed how some people will hand contractors 100k without even seeing anything more than a shitty half baked concept plan. For owners a Designers main value is in 3 main things
1. To Maximize the effectiveness, value, and efficiency of the project/spaces through a thoughtful and informed process. (Good design)
2. To remove the mystery of the end result prior to construction.
3. To provide contractually binding drawings and documents between owner and builder.
Design-Build is a contract structure... ALDB is where architects also act as contractors. In many states, a GC licence/stamp is required when you are constructing for someone else. This varies by state. If you build for yourself, you may not require a GC license. Check your local laws.
When you want someone pale and obsessive about small details, get an architect every time.
Ah, not if it's in 9-point Arial Narrow!
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.