State law generally defines when an architect's stamp is required on a set of drawings.

generally its defined by the size, scope and program of the building when an architects stamp will be required...

PE's are great and all but they don't know their ADA

Or life safety/ egress either. There are of course exceptions...

So ADA and egress is our sole responsibility? Awesome! I cant wait until fire departments lobby for the ability to officially license Life saftey and egress as consultants.

don't forget specing the interor furniture... but oh yeah, I forgot.

the LEED ap can now handle that.

i was just throwing one exemplary thing out there...

an architect can 'design styrofoam trees for the building model'.

From what I have come to understand, some of the architects responsibilities include project coordination, building design, layout, material selections etc. These skills are not covered in any form of Engineering I am aware of (with the possible exception of project management).

As a practicing structural engineer, I could likely perform some of these tasks, but most likely not with the same skill, efficiency and care that a typical architect employees.

I understand architectural details and sections as the pertain to my structural system, but would be hard pressed to try and pull together a comprehensive architectural set on my own.

Also, who is in charge of keeping the rain out of the building? That would be us, guys. A great flashing details rocks my world.






But seriously: it's the whole synergy of form, efficiency, function, and desire that is what makes us architects. No other profession can do it as well as we can.

"it's the whole synergy of form, efficiency, function, and desire that is what makes us architects"

I totally agree - but Ive wittnessed first hand very good design build GC's that can and do the same thing. I fear an erosion of the license. The only thing that truely keeps its value protected is 1. Liability and 2. A large number of inferior contractors that give their profesion a bad name. But what if states start inacting a profesional contractor license? what will that mean for us? I still believe anyone with vision can probably design a good building. Architects at heart if you will.

I thought it was all about the stamp's double role as a butt-plug...

I think the stamp is there to prove an actual Architect prepared the construction Documents. Without the stamp, well, it's just a bunch of crap from a (Architect wannabe) designer who can work with a client to develop a project and then work with an....
We hear the same thing over and over again from people who can't get the credentials and therefore can never call themselves an architect....

thanks, synergy. your response seems representative of the structural engineers i've worked with - very respectful and understanding of the various roles that go into a project. my gut tells me the vast majority of engineers would not stamp drawings that they did not feel comfortable stamping. not only is it unethical, it puts them at risk. to believe an engineer performs the same tasks as an architect shows a complete lack of understanding of the roles for each profession.

if i had a stamp.... i would stamp napkins and hand them out to hott designers and then tell them...."anything you sketch on this napkin is official and i approve"......

then tell them "it's for the kids"


der

H2O Management, UV, Thermal coefficients,Gravity,Wind Loading, Culture, Accessibility, Economy of Material,Functionality, Circulation/Flow, Historical Precedent,Color Theory, Ergo-Dimensional Tolerances, Zoning Parameters, Landmarks/Historic Preservation, Property Values,Marriage Counseling..

...etc,etc

thanks for the replies everyone.

i was hoping someone was going to say something like "the buiding department will not accept your drawings without an architect's stamp" thus giving an undeniable reason for needing it, but i'm still having trouble trying to justify this.

The issue first came up when a potential client asked me what need is there for an architect's stamp on the drawings if you're technically able to do this type of work without one, and an engineer's stamp can get the project permitted? Clients who are closet architects always ask this because they want reassurance that you are not only able to design and choreograph a project well, but apart from either being a starchitect and a good project manager, that there is also some unassailable reason why architects (and those who do the work of an architect, but can't legally call themselves as such) are indeed necessary.

Pokzatek, i appreciate your thoughts, but what i'm looking for is not self-reassurance. what i'm grappling with, rather, is what incentive there is for those who are not yet licensed to want to achieve this apart from the fear of engaging in a liability battle, or the fear of being sued by the aia for false representation?

is there anyone out there that has a definitive and indisputable reason?

thanks again.

misguided,

pacific.

Here's a reason:

Knowledge.

i don't know why architects are so reluctant to say that they can do things better than engineers or consultants. We go through years of education and training, we have to endure at least 9 (soon 7) exams, and yet we're still afraid to admit that we KNOW the things we know.

A good architect - in theory, one that would give you your stamp - is a person who knows how to put the structure of the building together, which way the air moves in and out of the building, where you will get the best natural light, and why you can't build in a particular soil type with a particular material. We know these things - and a whole bunch of stuff about program and egress and ADA, too - and the idea is, we know them better than anyone else.

So, in conclusion, you get what you pay for.

to me licensure is the public's way to uphold a minimum standard for the profession in terms of safety. i don't necessarily think it reflects talent or personal expertise.

i mention this bc one of my design instructors in undergrad refused to take the exams bc he thought it only teaches you to design the most pragmatic building possible. although i think this is partially true, i thought he was missing the point.

you can be the most talented surgeon in the world, but no one will let you touch a scalpel until you are a registered doctor. same goes for an architect.

pacific, i don't think your getting the simple, straight up answer you're looking for, because we don't know what specifically all of the individual state laws are for when an architect's stamp is and is not required. quizzical's first response is closest to what you're looking for and the closest to a legal reason why you need a stamp, "State law generally defines when an architect's stamp is required on a set of drawings." you can do a little research at your local building permit office, if you are really interested to know all the specific instances, but my suggestion, if you are a young professional, is to get away from this easy way out mind set and really learn from first hand experience why an architect's stamp is important and necessary.

If you can find an engineer to Seal the Drawings go find one if that is all it takes. Just be sure he provides Errors and Ommissions Insurance Certification. I believe once this is ask for, most of them will run away from the project as fast as they can.

Architectural Design instructors who refuse to take the exam should not be teaching.

oh yeah...self-reassurance, I forgot that is another important reason.

the real question is when did the stamp actually come into existance....

is the project like someone's garage? because there are many projects that 'closet architects' might decide to do that don't legally require a stamp...

with the right music and surroundings

To answer cryzko's question above:

"Having set the standards for a professional architectural education in America, Nathan Clifford Ricker was greatly concerned about raising the general level of professional competence in architecture. He joined forces with Dankmar Adler to promote a state law to license architects. On June 3, 1897, after numerous attempts made over many years, the Fortieth General Assembly of the State of Illinois passed into law “[a] bill for an act to provide for the licensing of architects, and regulating the practice of architecture as a profession” to become effective on January 1, 1898. Illinois had become the first state in the nation to require licenses for its architects, and thus had led the way to what would eventually become a standard part of an architect’s career.'

But what did that law say was an architect? What was the standard?

snook_dude...i don't understand your comment about professors who refuse to take the exam. how is taking a licensing exam going to make you a better professor? i have been working for nine years and have been offered a teaching position and i don't think i will ever take the test. i have worked with many extremely talented people during my career and can probably count on one hand how many were licensed. i also know quite a few licensed architects that i wouldn't trust to design a dog house.

"He came to believe that an architect should, first and foremost, be a safe and economical builder, and, second, a capable businessman. Lastly, he should be a designer of pleasing forms. In 1899 Ricker explained his pedagogical goal in Inland Architect magazine as creating builders of “good architecture,” which he explained, “must largely consist of good and honest construction, obtaining the best results possible for the means available for the purpose, employing all improvements in the system of construction and materials, and in the protection of the life and health of inmates of the buildings.” Regarding the relative importance of aesthetics in design, he noted, “The highest perfection of style is demanded by comparatively few buildings.” "


Thats a good article - I bnever heard of this guy and I went to Illinois Chicago



link

exactly to my point jjh. the license is a MINIMUM standard...it doesn't guarantee talent or expertise.

and this professor that refused to take the exam has excelled professionally, he just has other people stamp drawings.

dot...what is this minimum standard you talk of? does it mean that i can memorize ARE flash cards and pass a few exams. why did i spend so many years in school when i could have just simply taken an online study course to be an architect? maybe i am over thinking the title architect, but i always laugh when i am told you can't call yourself an architect until you have passed the test. i would rather be called an artist or designer. don't architects wear all black and goofy glasses...i definately don't fit into that box.

once again, we get ourselves all wrapped around the flag pole on the distinction between an "architectural designer" and an "architect".

state law defines what it means to be an "architect" and those concerns typically are focused on health, safety and welfare issues. these are the people the state deems as having provided sufficient evidence that they're qualified to design buildings that won't harm the building's occupants and neighbors. you can rail against this approach all you want, but state governments are pretty comfortable with this idea and it's not likely to change in our lifetimes.

"architectural designers" (whether that term is sanctioned by the state or not) are pretty much whatever they want to be -- don't have to meet any particular standards; don't have to demonstrate any particular competence; generally this group makes up the "pretty picture" crowd and tends to predominate on college faculties.

I was looking in the NYT Sunday Addition and there was a listing for and Architect which turned out to be someone working with Computers and not as a cad monkey. I wonder if those guys have to get licensed? I also wonder if they have to Seal all their drawings
and sign them? Then I wonder if they have to review shop drawings ....damn there is alot of wondering going on...when it comes to the use of the Title Architect.

I went to the electronic help wanted adds and damn if it wasn't loaded with people looking for Architects....but they weren't the building type of Architect....again all computer related. Maybe I should jump professions ...and become an Architect that makes lots of money. It must take the same basic skills.....wouldn't you thunk?

no, it really doesn't take the same set of skills.

"Information Architect: Information architect is the job designation for a person who practices information architecture, a person dedicated to organizing and structuring content for access on an intranet web site. A relatively new discipline with as yet no official certification process, an information architect takes into account issues concerning content, users and business context as they impact the information design. Developing a taxonomy is one of the functions an information architect would undertake. An information architect may specialize in thesaurus design, metadata and classification. Specialists in classification are sometimes referred to as taxonomists."

one fact that no one has mentioned is that if a contract is drawn up with an owner and contractor using the AIA's contract, the architect's stamp is necessary to determine the legality of a set of drawings that will be built from. this means that the contractor and owner receive a set of legal documents from the architect that constitute the scope of the work. it means that the contractor is then held to meet the legally defined scope of the construction documents and to not meet them is a breach of contract. this is the fundamental act that is supposed to establish the balance of power within the construction of the project and position the architect as the agent acting in the owners interest in meeting the scope defined within the documents.
this is something that having an architect stamp your drawings buys you...an established legal structure for liability and litigation that doesn't exist otherwise.....

and on top of that it means we can get you a permit.

believe it or not, this would be my main argument as most people have heard at least a few good stories about the he-said, she-said nature of litigation with a contractor without a legal set of construction documents and contracts forming the basis of the relationship...that alone....think of it as construction insurance.

in fact, ask any accountant or lawyer if entering into a partnership is a good idea without a limited liability structure and see what they tell you......

Continued thanks.

Has anyone ever done work for themselves ahead of being licensed?
If so, how did you make it work (contract-wise, liability-wise, payment-wise)?
What advice have you?

thanks.

I have yet to get licensed...I am sort of in between the intern phase and imminent Grad School ..I think I said this before , or on other threads but the key to your question is to position yourself as a skillful coordiniator/designer.

I do T.I.s, Single Family Dwellings and additions by working with clients and contractors to select the engineering teams, etc. Working with contractors takes the liability heat off a bit. Obviously I am putting myself out there in some ways as I have no insurance yet.....and have heard all about this on these threads.

You can charge about up to 50$/hourly reasonably, but after that the lack of Licensure, Registration, and Liability creates a ceiling ..and you are always humping to overcome the non-billable hours...so it looks good on paper at times, but entrepreneurial design requires an MBA to be done well.(IMHO)..

I only recommend non-licensure , if you are happy with Single Family Residence, and have some gumption. .or going into Real Estate Investment.

i don't know about north america, but here in japan it is pretty straightforward....

stamping dwg is impt in terms of responsibility for who said did specced what, but if you want a building over a certain size (about 100 m2) an architects stamp is required to get a construction permit and a building completion permit.

you can build without those. no bank will give you a loan for a building without them. they used to but now it turns out that banks who finance dodgy architectural buildings are ECONOMICALLY liabel. not sure what the structure is but basically the banks are being audited for making risky loans and fined when caught being stupid.

my partner buys buildings here in tokyo as part of his business as developer....5 years ago an uncertified building could be purchased at a discount rate....now. no way. which means you have to buy with own equity. not easy for most. so if you own that building you are probably going to continue to own it until someone is willing to buy the thing for the value of the land alone. not a good position to be in.

we have learned typically that buildings that are not certified have problems with FAR, usually with an extra story or two, or otherwise have some bent things happening. ocassionally we fix those things in properties as part of our business, in order to get the buildings certified by local guv. sometimes that means sealing off an entire floor (! ). sometimes it just means submiting shadow drawings and such. it is, altogether, an enormous waste of money.

which is to say....those minimum standards are important. not as architecture=design inportant but from a business standpoint. the owners of those buildings could have saved a lot of money and grief if they had just had their buildings stapmed and followed the laws. maybe they made a lot by not doing so in the 90's so it was a reasonable risk, but not anymore.

on other hand there are a lot of stamped architect-certified buildings out there that are unsafe through unethical practices...so it doesn'T assure anything except that when found to be flawed the authorities know who to put in jail.

as an aside contractors here are legally able to do same as architect. i don't mind that at all. they can't design worth shit and some clients prefer content plus the basics.

works for me.

See IBC Code Section 106.1.1
More and More jurisdictions are adopting IBC.

106.1 Submittal documents.
Construction documents, statement of special inspections and other data shall be submitted in one or more sets with each permit application. The construction documents shall be prepared by a registered design professional where required by the statutes of the jurisdiction in which the project is to be constructed. Where special conditions exist, the building official is authorized to require additional construction documents to be prepared by a registered design professional.
Exception: The building official is authorized to waive the submission of construction documents and other data not required to be prepared by a registered design professional if it is found that the nature of the work applied for is such that review of construction documents is not necessary to obtain compliance with this code.

j,
that quote only addresses the requirement that whenever an architect produces either drawings or specifications, they are required to stamp all drawings and the cover page to the specifications.

in other words, architects can't produce drawings and specs for use and not stamp them.

that quote doesn't address what projects require a stamp.

jeffe - are we reading the same thing? There is no conditional.

"The construction documents shall be prepared by a registered design professional where required by the statutes of the jurisdiction in which the project is to be constructed."

i was only referring to the quote provided by j and not the one by futureboy.

oh, sorry ;)

also, I have learned that sometimes you meet people in the AEC fields, and even though they licensed and registered,..it doesn't keep them from being a complete freakin' dingbats.

if the only question is "what kind of project requires a stamp" then you just need to call up your local AHJ "authority having jurisdiction" and describe the project and see if they required stamped drawings to issue a permit or if the project even requires a permit in the first place.... its that simple

Because the Post Office will return your drawings if they don't have a stamp on them - and that leads to expensive delays.

Stamps aren't always necessary, which seems to completely contradict the reasoning behind it in the first place, imho.