 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
dgambard
Member
| Joined: | Thu May 8th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |  |
|
Posted: Thu May 8th, 2008 07:05 pm |
|
| Somewhere along the line the USGBC realized it could make mounds of cash off of the Green Building Movement by charging outrageous fees for commissioning or even to become LEED certified yourself. The dang test is $400 dollars just to become a LEED AP. If you failed yup...you guessed it shell out another $400 dollars. Its more expensive to take this test than to take the PE to become an engineer. If they really were concerned about making buildings green they would make it affordable. Unfortunately they are laughing all the way to the bank. On top of this they are making it another "elite" profession just like architects have with their own profession. Why is it I can get a 4 year degree in engineering and become a PE and yet to become an architect you have to have a masters degree. The sad thing is that I know more as an engineer about building than any architect with their elitist masters degree. Oh...and I also have more common sense.
|
AbracaPocus
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 11th, 2004 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 591 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |   |
|
Posted: Thu May 8th, 2008 07:57 pm |
|
You don't have to have a masters degree to become an architect. There is no US state that requires a masters. Many require an NAAB-accredited professional degree - either a master OR a bachelor of architecture.
But there are still 20 states that allow licensing of architects without professional degrees - in some states with just a high school diploma - though this usually requires an extra-long internship (instead of the usual 3 year internship it can be anywhere from 5 to 13 years depending on state and education.)
As for LEED: the test is expensive, but there are as of yet no annual dues, renewal fees, continuing ed requirements, etc. I'm an architect and I paid +/- $1000 to take the ARE exam, and I pay annual dues to two states presently (about $380 per year) and I pay NCARB certification dues annually ($190 per year) and I have to accumulate a certain number of continuing ed credits per year.
When I add up all of that, LEED accreditation seems like a bargain...Last edited on Thu May 8th, 2008 07:58 pm by AbracaPocus
|
dgambard
Member
| Joined: | Thu May 8th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu May 8th, 2008 09:26 pm |
|
| North Carolina requires a masters...go look it up
|
TWMSFLNC
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 12th, 2007 |
| Location: | USA |
| Posts: | 20 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 02:13 am |
|
North Carolina does NOT require a master's degree, YOU go look it up.
Engineers might know more about their respected discipline but architects are the one responsible for connecting dots. Your statement about being an engineer knowing more about building than ANY architect is just ludicrous.
More common sense ?Last edited on Fri May 9th, 2008 02:27 am by TWMSFLNC
|
AbracaPocus
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 11th, 2004 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 591 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 02:25 am |
|
Look it up yourself here: http://www.ncbarch.org/laws/Chapter_83A.pdf
North Carolina does not require a masters. They require an NAAB-accredited professional degree - either Bachelors or Masters of Architecture.
Anyway: some states allow licensed engineers to automatically qualify to take the architecture licensing exam, and some other states allow an engineer to practice architecture under an engineer license.
|
awapniak
Architect
| Joined: | Mon Mar 19th, 2007 |
| Location: | Brooklyn, NY |
| Posts: | 2440 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | www.adamaaron.com |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 04:31 am |
|
dgambard wrote: The sad thing is that I know more as an engineer about building than any architect with their elitist masters degree. Oh...and I also have more common sense.
Ooh, goodie! How I just love interdisciplinary flame wars!
Troll. Get out of our dungeon.
|
dgambard
Member
| Joined: | Thu May 8th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 12:40 pm |
|
I did look it up. As I mentioned before I can get a 4 year degree and become an engineer. Taken directly from their rules an " the Bachelor of Architecture which is a five-year program or the Masters in Architecture". How are you equating a 4 year degree to a five year degree?
3. hold a degree in architecture from a college or university where the degree program has been accredited by NAAB (National Architectural Accrediting Board). These degrees include the Bachelor of Architecture which is a five-year program or the Masters in Architecture. Two universities in North Carolina offer the NAAB accredited program - North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC and University of North Carolina at Charlotte, NC.
As for your idea that its relatively inexpensive. When it costs and extra 20,000 to 75,000 dollars just to commision a building is a developer or owner going to want to do that just to get a little piece of paper.
Milwaukee's new Urban Ecology Center is one of the greenest buildings in the upper Midwest. Certified? No, "because it could have added as much as $75,000 to the cost, just for the paperwork," says Executive Director Ken Leinbach.
I can site multiple examples of this occuring. Personally I would rather build a green building and know its green through my common sense, than to have to pay a someone (LEED consultants, the USGBC) thousands of dollars for them to tell me that it is indeed green.
|
RealLifeLeed
Member
| Joined: | Thu Mar 27th, 2008 |
| Location: | Charleston, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 53 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | LEED AP |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 01:06 pm |
|
I agree that the USGBC charges for some things that they probably should not. I feel that all education materials should be made free or at least a good deal cheaper. You also shouldn't have to work for a member company (or be on a project) to access the CIRs. These same CIRs could be a great study tool for people practicing to become a LEED AP.
That said, I do not feel the USGBC is out there to make loads of money. For who? Who is this conglomerate of people cashing in on the sustainability movement? It's a non-profit company, so feel free to check their 990 form on http://www.guidestar.org if you'd like. Last I heard, the USGBC is in the process of allocating $2 million in green research grants that will push sustainability even further...
If I had to guess, I would say Rick Fedrizzi if probably making a fair amount of money, but the leader of an organization with over 10,000 member companies and over 40,000 LEED APs probably deserves as much.
"As for your idea that its relatively inexpensive. When it costs and extra 20,000 to 75,000 dollars just to commision a building is a developer or owner going to want to do that just to get a little piece of paper."
As for the comment above, I would think an engineer of all people would realize that commissioning services should be done regardless of whether a project is seeking LEED or not. In every project we've worked on with a decent CxA there were measurable and significant improvements in building performance.
It does cost money to get through the paperwork, but I swear it makes sure that everyone is doing what they say their doing, especially the contractor. The documentation requirements make it clear whether environmental goals are achieved or are not. Also, I would wager that 75K fee wouldn't change much whether you're working on a 5,000 sf bank or a 500,000 20-story office building... There are definitely situations where LEED isn't as feasible economically, and that is typically for smaller buildings. This is something that needs to be changed, perhaps through more prescriptive compliance paths for small facilities, but at the same time it's no reason to throw the whole system away...
Joel
http://www.reallifeleed.com
|
dgambard
Member
| Joined: | Thu May 8th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 01:51 pm |
|
Look at it this way. When energy start appliances first came out how did we know thay were energy star? Well..it had that little yellow sticker from the manufacturer. Well who made the manufacturer meet a certain certification? The Department of Energy. Does it cost you any extra money when you buy an appliance to know that it is energy star? Does that little yellow piece of paper cost you money to get. No....and now the majority of appliances sold are energy star certified. Why is this...because it costs the consumer nothing.
If there is going to be a real movement towards being sustainable it has to be sponsored by the government or by a truly non-profit organization. I'm sorry but I can't believe that the USGBC isn't making any money. The consumer (ie, buildier, developer, owner) has to realize the benefit without undue cost. This is the only way to truly cut building emissions.
Now I am not speaking of anything other than that certification. In no way am I advocating that the government or someone else pay for you to get solar panels, or recycle your waste water ect. But there does need to be incentive for normal people (ie single family home owners, small business owners, small building owners) to participate.
|
AbracaPocus
Member
| Joined: | Sat Dec 11th, 2004 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 591 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 03:05 pm |
|
dgambard: I'm not equating a 4-year and 5-year bachelor's degree. Your initial statement - in your first two posts - was that a masters is required. You said North Carolina requires a masters...go look it up
A masters isn't required in any state. That's all I was saying. A B.Arch isn't a masters.
Besides, you didn't check into this deeply enough: there is also a way to get an architecture license in North Carolina with just a four year degree or less: North Carolina accepts NCARB's Broadly Experienced Professional certification. That involves getting licensed first in one of the 20 states that does allow licensing without a professional degree, and then practicing as a licensed architect for at least 8 years - so it isn't really an expedient solution for the average engineer who wants to turn himself into an instant architect.
I'm not sure exactly what your issue is with this. Most people who would plan to make architecture their career would expect to go through an architecture education. Is your position that a 4-year degree in engineering should satisfy the requirement for an architecture education? If so, why? Did you take any architecture studio courses in engineering school? Project management? Architecture history & theory? Contract administration? Or any of the other coursework that is required in an NAAB program? My understanding is that the only typical overlaps in curriculae between engineering and architecture programs are in a few structures and materials courses. Otherwise they are distinct studies.
As for LEED: I'm not a big fan of it either, but the problem these days is that the USGBC has done a great job of getting it into the minds of the public that LEED = green/sustainable, and prospective clients do tend to ask "are you LEED accredited" - even if they have no intention of ever seeking certification for their project. They see it as a credential in green-ness. That's why I pursued it. As an architect the $400 is worth it if it keeps even one project from going to another firm. Last edited on Fri May 9th, 2008 08:48 pm by AbracaPocus
|
Meigs9
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jun 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | ARCHITECT, LEED, Virginia USA |
| Posts: | 899 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | I'm done! I'm doing my happy dance now! |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 06:19 pm |
|
dgambard wrote: The sad thing is that I know more as an engineer about building than any architect with their elitist masters degree. Oh...and I also have more common sense.
Boy...are you in the worng forum to get any kind of sympathy.
I have a couple of points:
1) My fellow forum members have pretty much proved that you don't need a master's degree to be an archtect. I know plenty of architects who don't. So, I won't comment on that non-sense.
2) Have you asked your employer to reimburse you for the exam, if you find the test so expensive?
3)Lastly, If you are so against LEED (and "elitist architects), why are you even on this forum?
|
Meigs9
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jun 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | ARCHITECT, LEED, Virginia USA |
| Posts: | 899 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | I'm done! I'm doing my happy dance now! |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 9th, 2008 06:36 pm |
|
dgambard wrote: If there is going to be a real movement towards being sustainable it has to be sponsored by the government or by a truly non-profit organization. I'm sorry but I can't believe that the USGBC isn't making any money. The consumer (ie, buildier, developer, owner) has to realize the benefit without undue cost. This is the only way to truly cut building emissions.
Now I am not speaking of anything other than that certification. In no way am I advocating that the government or someone else pay for you to get solar panels, or recycle your waste water ect. But there does need to be incentive for normal people (ie single family home owners, small business owners, small building owners) to participate.
D.C. recently passed a bill requiring all city funded projects be LEED certified. By 2012, all private building projects over 50,00sf built in the District have to be LEED certified. I currently have clients, who although they recognize the importance of sustainability, are instructing our firm to keep the square footage under 50,000 sf so they don't have to be LEED certified. If you leave it up to private developers, many won't go down the sustainablity route. LEED provides local governments with a checklist for architects and builders to present to the public. The Feds already have started giving tax incentives to homeowners who make energy efficient improvements to their homes. I've used it myself. LEED maynot be perfect but it is a starting point.
http://www.doe.gov/taxbreaks.htm
http://www.constructionweblinks.com/Resources/Industry_Reports__Newsletters/Apr_16_2007/wash.html
|
stcarch
Member
| Joined: | Tue May 6th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 6 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Sat May 10th, 2008 01:45 pm |
|
dgambard wrote: Somewhere along the line the USGBC realized it could make mounds of cash off of the Green Building Movement by charging outrageous fees for commissioning or even to become LEED certified yourself. The dang test is $400 dollars just to become a LEED AP. If you failed yup...you guessed it shell out another $400 dollars. Its more expensive to take this test than to take the PE to become an engineer. If they really were concerned about making buildings green they would make it affordable.
I kind of have to agree...(not the part about architects)...but let's take a look at what the GBCI lists as "benefits" to becoming LEED accredited.
• Provides a marketable credential to an employer, prospective employer or client..OK
• Listing on GBCI website directory of LEED Accredited Professionals..Big whoop!
• LEED Accredited Professional certificate..Woo Hoo!
• Receive recognition for involvement in the LEED Certification process..I'm thrilled beyond belief...
The employer and industry benefits are not that much more impressive. I do believe that designing Green is important and becoming LEED is all the rage right now, but I think its safe to say that most clients are not enthused about forking out more money just to get a project certified. After all, what does that get them? A placque? That's pretty apropos considering all you get are letters behind your name. By the way, I passed the LEED exam yesterday! There's my two cents...keep the change.
|
mr. bojeangles
Member
|
Posted: Mon May 12th, 2008 05:30 pm |
|
LEED definately needs to do something better for people who become LEED APs. I could simply photoshop a certificate and call myself one. You don't receive a "license" number or anything like that. Just a crappy piece of paper. This needs to be better regulated, like our Architecture license.
|
Meigs9
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jun 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | ARCHITECT, LEED, Virginia USA |
| Posts: | 899 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Describes Me: | I'm done! I'm doing my happy dance now! |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue May 13th, 2008 05:40 pm |
|
mr. bojeangles wrote: LEED definately needs to do something better for people who become LEED APs. I could simply photoshop a certificate and call myself one. You don't receive a "license" number or anything like that. Just a crappy piece of paper. This needs to be better regulated, like our Architecture license.
Why? You read a book and passed an exam. You can now put little letters after your name on your business card. You need more???
An architecture license is not comparable since the whole point of getting licensed is to protect health, safety and welfare of the public. LEED has nothing to do with HSW...it's just a checklist of sustainable practices.
|
mr. bojeangles
Member
|
Posted: Tue May 13th, 2008 06:14 pm |
|
Well put. Obviously licensure and reciprocity outweigh leed accreditation tenfold. I am trying to make the point that leed seems like a membership when all is said and done, even after studying the materials and taking the exam, you just have that "membership" certificate, but no linked number or anything. Why should something that seems so nameless/pointless require an exam (and fees) to obtain the movement's educational standard? Why must this "green movement" cost us money when it is just a simple checklist which people choose to memorize? LEED should not be charging for the exam if their goal is to educate "everyone." They will make their money on certification of projects through all the more people who are educated in its' tactics.
|
hperkins
Member
| Joined: | Wed May 14th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1 |
| Exams Taken: | | | Exams Passed: | | | Describes Me: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Wed May 14th, 2008 04:12 pm |
|
"Did you take any architecture studio courses in engineering school? Project management? Architecture history & theory? Contract administration? "
1st: Engineers take project management courses, countract administration and so forth, maybe not as indepth as an architect but there are required classes in Civil Engineering for those subjects.
2nd: What does arhitecture history and theory apply to the safety of a building ? Which is the only thing that should be regulated. I have a Master Code Professional Certification through the ICC, in 2010 I will take my PE test, at that point why would I not be quallified to do the life safety analysys and design of a building? Most of what Architects do that they learn in school is not code knowledge, that is what they get by experience. I do not belive how the building looks should be a regulated profession. In the old days Architects designed the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, as well as did the structural design. At that point I aggree that architecture should have been regulated to just architects, but now the engineers do the designs and the architects do the code analysis.
Right now a interior/exterior designer in my opinion is the difference between a person with a BS in engineering and a BS in architecture without experience. No life safety issues are covered by most schools for architecture, at least per what the architects I work with have said.
|
King
Member
| Joined: | Thu Apr 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | NYC, New York USA |
| Posts: | 358 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP | | Describes Me: | waiting for BT |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Jul 21st, 2008 07:17 pm |
|
Last edited on Mon Jul 21st, 2008 07:19 pm by King
|
King
Member
| Joined: | Thu Apr 3rd, 2008 |
| Location: | NYC, New York USA |
| Posts: | 358 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP | | Describes Me: | waiting for BT |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Mon Jul 21st, 2008 07:17 pm |
|
dgambard wrote: The sad thing is that I know more as an engineer about building than any architect with their elitist masters degree. Oh...and I also have more common sense.
This kind of comment really does not help anyone... You might know how to create an ugly functional building, but I bet you CANNOT design a beautiful & efficient building.
I have an Structural Engineer friend (he is drop-out from arch) who had the same opinion before.
Later on, I found out he does not even know what FAR is... How can someone does not know the most basic zoing term design building?
On the other hand, I have to agree with your point that some Arch. do not use their common senses when designing buildings.
Last edited on Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 01:33 pm by King
|
archigator
Member
| Joined: | Thu Dec 6th, 2007 |
| Location: | Gainesville, Florida USA |
| Posts: | 952 |
| Exams Taken: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP, BT | | Exams Passed: | PD, GS, LF, ME, BD/MM, CD, SP, BP | | Describes Me: | Waiting to retake BT! |
| Status: |
Online
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Tue Jul 22nd, 2008 12:08 pm |
|
dgambard wrote: Somewhere along the line the USGBC realized it could make mounds of cash off of the Green Building Movement by charging outrageous fees for commissioning or even to become LEED certified yourself. The dang test is $400 dollars just to become a LEED AP. If you failed yup...you guessed it shell out another $400 dollars. Its more expensive to take this test than to take the PE to become an engineer. If they really were concerned about making buildings green they would make it affordable. Unfortunately they are laughing all the way to the bank. On top of this they are making it another "elite" profession just like architects have with their own profession. Why is it I can get a 4 year degree in engineering and become a PE and yet to become an architect you have to have a masters degree. The sad thing is that I know more as an engineer about building than any architect with their elitist masters degree. Oh...and I also have more common sense.
If you are upset with LEED and the system why are you trashing architects? It seems like you may be in the wrong field! Maybe you should be looking for a job that is "laughing all the way to the bank" and where you don't have to work with "elitist degreed nim-witted architects"! I thought we were all here to work together, you might as well forget about working on a LEED project if you aren't willing to be a Team Member!
|
Current time is 12:29 pm | |
|
|
|
|
