« HPLO seeks guidelines for new architecture in historic districts | Main | Apps and evolution: assessing how the city works »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

A Facebook User

As a spec builder who typically uses Architects, we are in the minority. This is especially true considering our homes usually sell for prices far below the median. People who have seen our Martha's Green development know what a talented Architect can bring to the party.

We were once duped by a designer posing as an Architect. We only found out once plans for a 12 unit condo development were rejected at permit. The State fined the guy $10K then waved it upon his request. We sued to get the fees back and obtained a judgement the we have been unable to collect. Lesson learned.


Martha's Green looks interesting. Were you also involved in Jake's Run with Fletcher Farr Ayotte Architects? That is one of the projects that made me decide to work there. I bike by it all the time. Great example of what spec builders can do when they work with Architects!

Arch True

As a residential architect (formerly) licensed in Oregon, I can tell you the continuing education requirements are both time consuming and very expensive - for what benefit? You certainly can't charge more for your services since the pay rate for residential design is absurdly low. Unless you do commercial work (where a license is required) it does not make sense to either be a residential architect or be a builder who hires one.


Meanwhile, many architects call themselves "planners", and many architecture and engineering firms include "planning" in their names despite having no planners on their staff.


"Planning" can have many meanings in the context of an Architecture or Engineering firm. Facilities planning, Space planning, Master planning, etc.

I worked at a firm that had planning in their title, but we had two Urban Planners on staff at the time.

Rick Balkins

Hello Robert Nobles,

As a building designer, (not a licensed architect) - I agree that those who engage in the profession of building design by fraudulent means and methods like illegally using a protected title should be reported. In addition, organizations like the HBA, should verify their facts and not cause burden on building designers who may have intended to do this with no misrepresentation. This should surely be reported so corrections be made for legal compliance.

Most of us has no intent to misrepresent the public and many of us serve clients in a manner that is A) professional, B) honest, C) with great quality.

This is why I support you on the instance but I want to make sure you understand and not just view all of us as criminals that are out to screw the public. It might be helpful that you don't make allusions that all unlicensed building designers are criminals out to endanger the public. That is a categorization by allusion. Which is a misrepresentation in itself. So be careful and clear about that.

I would be happy to talk with you over phone or in person but I am currently in Eugene and schedule would not allow for a lot of traveling to Portland, Oregon.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Lead Sponsors


Portland Architecture on Facebook

More writing from Brian Libby


  • StatCounter
Blog powered by Typepad

Paperblogs Network

Google Analytics

  • Google Analytics

Awards & Honors