Why Engineers Are NOT Designers by Team A360

Here’s a shout out to the “oldie” Civil Engineer proponents who are pushing for CEs to be allowed to sign architectural plans. Civil Engineering undergrads, we hope you get to read this, and we hope it spurs you to wake up and take a look at how illogical your oldies are. -_-

This post is not an affront to the Civil Engineers of the Philippines. Its sole purpose is to illustrate simple truths that the less-corrupt officials of our government should consider:

Engineering does not have a SINGLE design class, and they’re going to be allowed to sign design plans? Architecture students take FIVE structural design classes to complete the course. I’m guessing majority of CE students aren’t aware of this. Yes, we know how to design beams, columns, footings and trusses to combat shear, bending, buckling, etc. Yes, we have to ingrain empirical formulas in our heads to smoothly go through the step-by-step process of sizing structural members and their components. Yes, we know how to do the portal method for structural frames. We’re trained to do structural calculations for up to 2-storey buildings, at the very least. But that doesn’t cause us young architects to go around claiming we’re skilled enough to sign structural documents. We get it- you’re the SPECIALISTS at structure. It’s what you’re trained for. You DESERVE the RIGHT to be the SOLE structural professional.

We’re the DESIGN specialists – kindly give us the same right.

Engineers are specialists in engineering, designers are specialists in design. Architectural for Architects, Structural for CEs.

Now you might think “big deal, pampaganda lang naman ang design ah“. How very wrong this is. Read some of the previous posts of this blog and ask yourself if you’ve ever been trained in class to think like that. Good design uplifts the standard of life. Bad design destroys communities (not an exaggeration).

As a strong example, we at Arch360 Philippines would like to give you an insider’s view on how Architecture students are trained to design, and how CEs aren’t.

If we were to say, gather two teams of 6 people for an esquisse (an architectural exam): 5 Arki Students + 1 Doctor and 5 CE Students +1 Doctor, lock them in separate rooms with all the materials they need, and give them 3 days to design a 100 BED HOSPITAL.

To make things even easier, we’ll even provide the Space Programming (shown below)

It’s now up to the teams think like designers and interpet the implications of the data below to produce an effective design proposal. Plans, sections, elevations, Site Development Plans, Perspectives and Sectional Perspectives, Conceptual Utility Layouts even.

Welcome to the world of designer. This is what we are TRAINED to do. Remember, screw up the layout and people could actually die. (again, not an exaggeration)

Let the designing begin!


    (SQ. MTS.) (SQ. MTS.)
  Lobby 45.00  
  Admitting Office 18.00  
  Affiliate’s Room and Library 45.00  
  Office of the Chief of Hospital w/ Toilet 36.00  
  Accounting Room w/ Toilet 36.00  
  Office of the Chief Nurse w/ Toilet 27.00  
  Office of the Administrative Officer w/ Toilet 27.00  
  Business and Finance Office w/ Toilet 108.00  
  Office of the Department Head – (Typical) 18.00  
  Conference Room 36.00  
  Printing and Storage Room 13.50  
  Public Toilet Facilities 36.00  
  Radio Room 9.00  
  PHILHEALTH 27.00  
  Sub-Total   508.50
       Office Area 22.50  
       Records Area 36.00  
      Toilet 4.50  
  Sub-Total   63.00
      Nurse Station 31.50  
      Minor Operating Room 18.00  
      Treatment Cubicles 22.50  
      Observation Room 45.00  
      Waiting Area with Stretcher Nook 18.00  
      Doctor’s On Duty  Room w/ Toilet 31.50  
      Nurses’ Locker Room w/ Toilet 18.00  
  Sub-Total   184.50
  SCRUB-UP 9.00  
  CLEAN-UP ROOM 13.50  
      Staff Locker Room and Toilet 27.00  
      Staff Lounge 18.00  
      Nurses’ Locker Room w/ Toilet 18.00  
      Nurse Station 18.00  
      Septic Nursery and Work Room 13.50  
      Suspect/Pathologic Nursery and Work Room 22.50  
      Breast-feeding Room 9.00  
  Sub-Total   607.50
      Rad-Fluoro X-ray  Room 27.00  
      Radiographic X-ray  Room 27.00  
      Changing Rooms w/ Toilets 13.50  
      Control Booth 4.50  
      Dark Room 13.50  
      Ultrasound Room 13.50  
      Waiting Area with Stretcher Nook 27.00  
      Radiologist’s Office w/ Toilet 18.00  
      Staff Room w/ Toilet 18.00  
      Clerical Room 13.50  
      Film File Storage 9.00  
  Sub-Total   184.50
      Bacteriology and Serology Section 18.00  
      Histopathology Section 18.00  
      Urinalysis and Biochemistry Section 18.00  
      Hematology Section 18.00  
      Blood Doning 13.50  
      Waiting Area w/ Toilet 31.50  
      Pathologist’s Office w/ Toilet 18.00  
      Staff Area 27.00  
      Glass Washing and Sterilizing 22.50  
      Storage Room 4.50  
      Locker Room and Toilet 13.50  
  Sub-Total   202.50
      Chief Pharmacist’s Office 13.50  
      Staff Work Area 13.50  
      Patient Dispensing Area and Drug Info. 13.50  
      Receiving/Breakout/Inspection Area 13.50  
      Flammable Storage 4.50  
      Bulk Storage 13.50  
      Extemporaneous Preparation Area 13.50  
      Distribution Area 18.00  
      Staff Toilet 4.50  
  Sub-Total   108.00
      OPD Waiting Area 54.00  
      OPD Admitting/Information Counter 18.00  
      Office of the OPD Chief 22.50  
      OPD Records Room 18.00  
       Consultation Room (Pedia/Under Six) 18.00  
      Consultation Room (Medical) 18.00  
      Consultation Room (Surgical) 18.00  
      Consultation Room (OB-Gyne) 18.00  
      Consultation Room (Family Planning) 18.00  
      Consultation Room (Dental) 36.00  
      Consultation Room (ENT) 18.00  
      Consultation Room (Eye) 18.00  
      Minor Operating Room 27.00  
      Utility Room 9.00  
      Toilet Facilities 36.00  
  Sub-Total   346.50
9.00 NURSING    
      Nurse Station 12.60  
      Utility Area 6.30  
      Linen Rooms 6.30  
      Treatment Room 15.96  
      Equipment Storage 3.84  
  TYPICAL 1-BED ROOM W/ T&B 9X18.00 = 162.00  
  TYPICAL 2-BED WARD W/ T&B 4X18.00 = 72.00  
  TYPICAL 4-BED WARD W/ T&B 2X36.00 = 72.00  
  Sub-Total 4X351.00 1404.00
  DIETITIAN’S OFFICE w/ Toilet 22.50  
  DRY STORAGE 9.00  
  Sub-Total   427.50
      Linen Office and Work Room 36.00  
      Central Linen Storage 27.00  
      Receiving and Sorting Area 54.00  
      Washing Area 63.00  
      Pressing and Ironing Area 54.00  
      Toilet 9.00  
  Sub-Total   243.00
      Office of the Chief Engineer 36.00  
      Bio-medical Equipment Room 27.00  
      Mechanical and Electrical Room 31.50  
      Carpentry Workshop 45.00  
      Locker Room and Toilet 27.00  
       Garage and Work Area 162.00  
       Power House w/ Generator 27.00  
  Sub-Total   355.50
13.00 MORTUARY    
      Lobby/Waiting Area 18.00  
      Autopsy Room 18.00  
      Morgue 9.00  
      Locker Room and Toilet 9.00  
  Sub-Total   54.00
  TOTAL AREA   4,689.00
  25-30% CORRIDORS   1,406.70
  GRAND TOTAL AREA   6,095.70


1)    Visitor Parking ——————————————– 36 slots

2)    Staff Parking ———————————————- 14 slots

3)    Service Parking (including ambulance) ————    6 slots

How did you do?

Did you consider daylight factor curves? Did you think of Amihan, Habagat and Sunpath to reduce energy consumption? How about OptimumRT and acoustical defects that could critically maim the OR? What is the proximity of Laboratory to Radiology? Did you supply a big enough OPD to answer the uniquely Filipino demand? Did you think about the need for a small additional minor-surgery space in the Emergency department because of how it works? How are you corridors designed? How does the positive and negative pressure of airflow work with respect to the wards, corridors, and Fire Exit? Remember, a design without air pressure in mind could mean that corridor-dwellers could be exposed to TB and smoke will enter your Fire Exit. Are they single loaded? Did you use Awning Windows for the cancer-ward knowing fully well the demographic’s tendency towards suicide? How much space did you allocate? What is the minimum sqm requirement of a urinal to be HUMANELY used? Does your grid have a column right in front of the reception desk?. Will there be a beam or p-trap lying directly over the Operating Bed? Does your plumbing layout concept take into consideration the 2% slope of the horizontal? How many circuit breakers do you have per floor? About how large does your septic tank need to be? Cistern? Overhead Tank? Did you consider the turning radius of a 13-wheeler truck for your basement ramp? Did you even consider the largest vehicle that the service zone would need for deliveries? is your basement parking laminar in flow? Did you design the building thinking about project management? Where will the site Temfacil be?

And of course… the Aesthetics part. Yung pampaganda.

Is your design aesthetic cohesive? Did you use biologically sound finishes that will brigthen up the spaces. Does the way you lined up your tiles unknowingly create a path that makes circulation less confusing? Do the wards have good views and vistas towards foliage and life to improve patient recovery? Are overall lighting levels producing glare on the bedside wall? Is your lobby welcoming and good for business? Did you design your ramp to the Emergency room thinking of the old crying lolo who will rush up on it, carrying his sick child? Is your form moulded in such a way that its apex will be seen from 3 blocks away, right from the corner of a major road? Do your brise soleils add depth and rhythm to the facade, while at the same time protect the soffits from rain and sun? Is your form a huge block, or did you create a complex of buildings with interstitial pocket gardens, opening up corridors to beautiful views and supplying great lighting and ventilation? Are your fire signages located .3M above the floor because you know users will CRAWL in a fire? Will your building fit well into the spirit of place of the community, or will it be too intimidating?

I typed all these considerations off the top of my head in 10 MINUTES. I’m a 4th year Architecture Student, and this is how I’ve been trained to think as I design. (This was actually one of our plates in 3rd year) As you can see, design students think about more than just the prettiness of it all.

It might not look it on the surface, but WE SAVE LIVES because of how we’re trained to think. Designing is valuable. And it is SHIT hard to get right.

Civil Engineers are no different. They SAVE LIVES in their own way for sure. And their work is of GREAT importance to the safety and welfare of the country. CEs are effing AWESOME at what they do, because they are trained to be awesome in that respect.

But if they think for a second that they are trained and qualified to save lives with design, I think the vast majority of CE students with “Dafuq” on their face after reading this will prove otherwise.

Hey, “oldie” CEs, aka the proponents, your course does not qualify you to be designers in the SLIGHTEST way. Architectural for Architects. Structural for Civil Engineers. No infringing on specialty.

Point proven. Now let us all please wake up and stick to where we were trained.

Categories: Uncategorized | 41 Comments

Post navigation

41 thoughts on “Why Engineers Are NOT Designers by Team A360

  1. Emina

    Bitch please. You don’t have to sound so aggressive about it. Tsk.

    • Hi Emina! We’re sorry you took this post as too negative. Rest assured, as was said in the introduction, it wasn’t meant to be an affront to the CEs. If you follow the train of thought you’ll find that a.) all aggression is directed towards the government and the “oldie” CEs b.) It does, in fact speak very strongly of the skill and need for Civil Engineers. We hope you get to see our assertion in the light of which it was intended to be seen. Thanks for passing by!

    • Emina, which part here is agressive to the point of being offensive? Do not call the writer, or anyone else, a bitch just because you dont agree with how they voiced out their opinions.. bitch 😉

      The way you responded is even much more offensive than the whole write up here.. bitch 😉

      Thanks for reading .. bitch 😉

      • While we do appreciate your defending our cause, we at A360 Philippines would like to think Emina’s use of ‘Bitch Please’ was in jest ala 9gag. Thanks again for the view but let’s not get things out of hand. 🙂

      • Emina

        @hate_bitches So I forgot that not all people in the internet visits 9gag. Okay, sorry for the phrase but as previously mentioned, it wasn’t supposed to be offend the poster.

        @arch360philippines hey thanks 9gagger! 😛
        Won’t comment any more so as not to do further damage.

  2. JC_Bilbao

    If I were to be ask of I would let the engineers to affirm an architectural plan, I would say yes, but only in a small scale designs like bungalows or any alike structure. But if they will design a BIG Structure, that’s one thing they shouldn’t mess up upon, there are many design considerations to take, which in case that only Architects can include in the designs. So if they shall be granted of affirming a design, their designing should have a limit.

    Plus, Nice note about this topic, if the CE’s really thought of the designing as “dafuq”, well they should start leaving the designing to the architects…


  3. May I just add, proper space programming is not only guided by end-user activities or preferences, the designer should be knowledgeable of all the codes concerning livable structures, e.g. National Building Code PD1096, Accessibility Code BP344 and Fire Code, RA9514, DOH even issues design guidelines for Hospitals.. these things are not known by layman, that’s why they see architects as simply “for aesthetics”.

    Remember to use these laws when you do your thesis in your 5th year ;p

    • Hi Joana! Yes, that is very true. The amount of codes Architects need to consider, and to a certain extent, know by heart, certainly isn’t a laughing matter. And yes, we’ll be sure to take your advice for our theses. :p Thanks again for your great insight. It’s an honor for someone like you to be part of this discourse. After all, you WERE number 6 in the June 2010 architecture board exam, correct? :> Naks!

  4. sarah gomez

    What kinds of plans are these engineers signing on? Did they design them by themselves or with the help of unlicensed architects or probably undergrad architecture students employed by them who are not capable of signing by themselves. In this case, should they look for a licensed architect who is not in any way responsible for the design at hand? Would you or any architect sign something which you did not do by yourselves? They are not signing for the plans that you made. They are signing for the plans that their company or employees made or designed for them.

    • Hi Sarah! 🙂 Here are a couple of key points to answer your questions. We hope it will clarify things for you.

      1.) The kind of plans Civil Engineers are now (potentially) allowed to sign on are architectural plans. In effect, their signing is seen legally as an APPROVAL of the design shown in the document. Again, it’s an approval, so the design could be their own or someone else’s original design.

      2.) While we would love to believe that all CEs will have qualified design professionals design their plans for them to approve, this is a perfect-world scenario. It’s not that we don’t have good faith in the pure Engineering firms. It’s more of, we’re aware socially of how dirty the current building practice situation is (it is bad), and how expediency is often prioritized over safety. We feel this should never be the case, but this current situation puts Philippine society to these very risks.

      3.) There is also an ethical undertone to the situation. As specialized professionals, you must respect the boundaries of other design professionals. The youth today should clamor for this. If even half of the building industry’s clientele decided to have CEs sign both structural and architectural in the interest of hitting two birds with one stone, think of how that would bury the architecture profession, which is already highly-competitive among its own professionals.

      Thanks for your comment. 🙂 We hope this will be of help.

  5. Actually, the history of CEs signing plans started during the post-war era, when there is a huge demand to build more buildings and infrastructures… since Architects were small in numbers during that time, CEs were allowed to design and sign plans in response to the demand. But that was years ago with different situation… hindi na supposedly applicable yung ginawa nila noon dahil iba na ang sitwasyon ngayon.

    And as the lead professional sa design, we need to know the basics of engineering design and utilities… that’s why we have subjects on structural, electrical, sanitary & plumbing, and even mechanical designs. But the sole purpose of those subjects is to make us aware of those fields and not to claim that we can do engineering designs just the same as the engineers… we just have to be aware because of the liability. 😉

    • Hello Glenn! That’s very true. It’s also true that our current situation was brought about in part by past quarrels of the older generation Architects and CEs. It’s unfortunate that the future of the current generation is compromised by bickerings of the past.Thanks for enlightening us with that historical background!

  6. YesItsMe

    CE shifting archi here. Now you really messed up my head. Lol.

  7. Don Valdez

    My stand on this issue is that I’m not really concerned about who will sign what plan. If I am a great architect, people will know it and should be able to prefer my design over civil engineers’. And I will sign the plans I make for those smart clients. I’d rather let the government (and old mean CEs) be concerned with the politics of these laws and do my part as an architect to serve the way I know how and should.

    Realistically, what are architects and engineers really concerned about? Less industry competition? More market opportunities? Dignity? Both architects and engineers should work together for the people, in all sense of altruism and public service. Be great in what you do and people will eventually recognize it because they will be experiencing it with their senses (not that you should singularly chase after that recognition). The public already knows or will eventually know the difference between a building designed by an architect and the one that is constructed only by an engineer. In terms of opportunities, architecture itself is a wide and diverse field. Look more into a specialization. I’m going to draw a line if a civil engineer will sign plans for a heritage conservation without an architect.

    What scary is that there is large volume of dicto simpliciter in this article (among other, well, logical fallacies), passionately written that it can easily make a naive reader just agree to it. It stereotypes that all architecture students are going to be good designers, who would consider all factors you mentioned above, and that an engineering student would not be able think about them when he eventually starts practicing. The complex question you gave only puts the architecture students at the advantage. There is a large and distinct difference between an academic exercise and real practice.

    Mario Salvadori, a late Columbian professor and structural engineer, once said that out a hundred graduates of architecture, only seven will be able to have a chance designing a building in the real world and the other ninety-three will just have minor responsibilities for other requirements by a building. It may be wildly exaggerated or not necessarily true now but you have to consider other aspects relating to architecture and be able to think what else can you do. I’m already paraphrasing but I suggest you read his entire speech “A daring piece of advice to young architects” especially the last part.

    Point. Worry more about being the best architect/engineer you can be and having you own individual competitive advantage, and the rest will fall into place, with or without stupid controversial laws.

    • Hi there Don! While we might not see eye-to-eye on this, we appreciate how your beliefs are leading you to pursue a nation-oriented career! 🙂 With that said, there will be a lot to argue about if we try to go point-for-point about this – potentially flooding this thread with a back and forth battle. To simplify, Our main disagreement comes with your assertion that the public already knows or will eventually wisen-up, and that greatness of the architect will resound over time. This is a slippery slope, but we understand why one would hold on to this thought. If you immerse yourself into the current social situation, you’ll see how much of an insane challenge that ideal really is, and how it calls for a collective movement of society as a whole to be achieved. This is why Arch360 Philippines hopes that this community will spur not just individual but collective action towards a more valued design profession, because we can’t rely on society, especially ours (sadly) to wisen up as we do our best with our individual practice. What if that assumption that society will value us over time does not materialize because we did not consider other possibilities? I shudder to think about it. We feel that there are times when radical (but still ethical) views must be presented to achieve a great good. We’re sorry we need to be the Simoun to your Crisostomo Ibarra; it’s annoying us as well. Haha.

      Also, while we see how it could be interpreted as a fallacy, one of our points is that formal education needs to be an important consideration for what you can or cannot do in practice- that or let the CEs take the Architecture Board exam if they want to sign architectural drawings. Of course we know for sure that a lot of the things about design you can learn in practice, but would you have brain surgery done to you by a heart surgeon who learned over time to do brain surgery? Chances are, you wouldn’t, until he finally licenses himself to be that as well. We hope you see the bigger picture that we are trying to present. We thank you and commend you for your intelligent and grounded views! We also hope your views might change over time as you delve deeper into the Philippines’ social context over the years. And hey, we’re open to our views changing as well, as long as it’s for the common good. It’s what I’m sure we’re both after, which is great. Hopefully we can share contexts in real life so we can see things through each others eyes. Mabuhay ka, Arkitekto Para sa Bayan!

  8. sarah gomez

    I agree with Don. Whether there is a law or not, in the end people will choose who amongst you have the competitive advantage. I have known an Architect who is not willing to give in to the design requirement of his Client. In the end, the client looked for another designer. He succeeded to meet a Contractor who employs both Architects and Engineers. Certain Architects have their style or signature which when being compromised, they become hard headed. Maybe this is an aspect that an Engineer/Contractor or Engineering firm or Construction company who is very liberal on these things come in handy. Its not that they are not knowledgeable on how to design but they have employed some of the 93% Architects (as mentioned by Don) to guide them.

    Isn’t it true that many licensed architects are under the employment of these Engineering firms and/or Construction companies? In effect are they not as capable as you in designing or is it just a matter of having less competition and gaining more opportunities?

    I have nothing against Architects but their nature of being artistic has sometimes cause more expenses than needed and what is available. If a Client truly wants his building or house become the signature of the Artist, then by all means hire the Architect.

    In the end, the Client will know what he wants and who he wants to talk with.

    • We agree with you on the importance of competitive advantage with this issue. 🙂 We never said we didn’t. Haha!

      Yes, there are definitely many licensed architects who are under the employment of Engineering firms. We’re definitely not against that. We understand now what you were getting at. Perhaps you’re thinking that our stand is one of a false dichotomy – a firm composed of all architects or nothing at all! What we’re saying is it’s perfectly fine for engineering firms to handle the design process, for AS LONG as they have architect’s participation to guide them through it, as you said.

      That’s it. I think that pretty much clears this up. If you were thinking we were so absolute that architects must be the only person involved in the design process, we’re definitely not pushing for that. We assert that designers must act as a check and balance in the design of a building, and if you think about it, that does translate into their sign of approval.

      Thanks again for the comment! 🙂 Hope this makes everything clear.


    Hi,I’m a licensed Architect and I would just like to add that the practice of architecture is a PRIVILEGE not a RIGHT.There should be full distinction between the two professions.Moreover,the practice of any profession is a PRIVILEGE to those who pass its examination.To be competitive today,you need to excel in your field of expertise or gain another professional license.That is the reason why many of my colleagues including myself are continuously studying and getting more PRC licenses( I think 3 or 4 should be sufficient).


    Year 2003. The UAP and PICE signed a joint resolution supporting the passage of Architecture and Civil Engineering bills delineating their respective scope of practice and strengthening their collaborative efforts in common goals.

    The two professional groups through their leaders stressed the need for the immediate passage of their respective bills, which would benefit their hundreds of thousand members nationwide.

    In Year 2004, the Architecture Act was passed and signed into law.

    In Year 2005, a petition for declaratory relief filed on 3 May 2005 by the PICE and civil engineer Leo Cleto Gamolo to declare null and void Sections 302[3] and [4] of the Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations (“Revised IRR”) of Presidential Decree No. 1096 (the “National Building Code”). The said provisions require that architectural documents submitted in applications for building permits must be prepared, signed and sealed by architects. PICE, et al. claim that the said sections of the Revised IRR, by effectively prohibiting civil engineers from also preparing, signing and sealing architectural documents, are contrary to the National Building Code and the Republic Act No. 544 (the “Civil Engineering Law”), which purportedly gave civil engineers the said right

    • Good day Sir! Thank you for this comprehensive history. 🙂 I think this will put a lot of people in perspective of how the current issue came to be. We also agree with you on profession being a privilege rather than a right, hence the licensure process. Thank you for your comments!

  11. JET

    I would like to comment on the above stated opinion of our architect friend.

    1. We are not pushing for CE’s to be allowed to sign architectural plans. It is already stated on the Law of Civil Engineer’s way before you are born (see below).

    Republic Act No. 544*
    (As Amended by R.A. 1582)
    An Act to Regulate the Practice of Civil Engineering in the Philippines
    Approved, June 17, 1950 (As amended by R.A. No. 1582, approved on June 16, 1956).

    Both professions (Civil Engineers and Architects) were given rights to design architectural plans (see Article V Miscellaneous Provisions – Section 24).

    How come architects wants to isolate us from designing. In the first place we have rights way before your law was passed.

    If this is the case, you must also give rights to interior designer because they can also design plans. Even that space programming can be done by an Interior Designer. Space programming can be done based on the requirement of the end user how come you are making a big deal out of it. So Interior Designers must also be given the same privileged as the Architects.

    Respect is the proper word for this. Both are doing fine on it’s on way, how come you are making it complicated.

    2. I will object on the statement that civil engineers don’t have a single design class. In our first year up to second year basic we are trained in our drawing class to design architectural drawings. From drawing 1 to drawing 4 we are doing design. Not only that we have building construction subject in our major, also we have 2 architectural subjects in our major and all our professor are Architects.

    3. Based on the civil engineering law we have equal rights. How come in your law you have isolated us. Is this fair. Give also the same rights to the Interior Designer if you want to be fair enough.

    4. Even an experience civil engineer can do your space requirement and some of my Interior Designer friends can do it much better.

    The final decision is up to the client.
    Only the owner has the final say if he or she will use the service of an Engineer or an Architect.

    For me both profession are mutual. They have both rights and so be it. Don’t make things more complicated.

    Many architects now are doing good in their profession and even becoming the head of the management team for construction which is intended also for civil engineers. Do we complain? I don’t think so.

    As a civil engineer we will protect our rights and this rights was given to us way before your law was passed. We will not sit here and relax while you do things your way.

    For discussion purposes only.


    • Hi there! 🙂 Since this comment was directed at V-ARCHITECT, we’ll reserve our opinions for until after we hear what he has to say. Let’s just remember for now though how different a number of contexts were from 1950 and today. Thanks for the view!

    • Calatrava Santiago

      Drafting subjects not an architectural design

  12. JET

    This is also intended to all future architects so that they will know.

    It is right to defend things your way but you must see things also the other way around.

    Do you know the repercussion of what you are doing?

    Do you know that in a sanitary/plumbing plans there are two professions who can sign it. A license sanitary engineer and a license master plumber. Both gain their licenses by passing the exam of our government licensing body (PRC). The former gain knowledge thru studies and the latter thru experiences or vice versa. This two profession is mutual to the other. A sanitary engineer knows what a skilled plumber can do. A master plumber is an expert also which he gain skills thru hard-work and experience. I know this because I am also a Sanitary Engineer.

    If this will be the case, if I’m greedy I will act and get the support of my fellow Sanitary Engineers to pass a Sanitary Engineering Law that will isolate us to our fellow professional (Master Plumber). We are both capable of doing the said work. The privileges and rights was given to us both in the beginning. Why will I isolate the thousand of master plumber who is earning a good living to feed their family?

    What about the new profession of interior designing, will you give them the same rights as you do.
    Will you let them sign architectural plans if they can make it. There will be new questions to answer.

    What about other professions which is mutually related to one another. What will happen to them?
    I think they will defend also their rights and privileges.

    For me leave it as is. Only improve and strengthen provisions like increase penalties to those who practice both profession without license. I think we need to move to the betterment of both profession. You need us we need you. Both profession are mutual.

    What you are claiming will only be possible if;

    1. University’s and colleges will remove curriculum’s that teaches design to civil engineering students. Which is not possible because we need those and it is part of our training.

    2. All those civil engineer’s who have those training in college and already have license will need to die first.
    To start a new beginning of only architect’s can sign architectural plans.
    Because we the present civil engineer’s will defend our existing rights and privileges, which is given to us in the first place and history will tell that we have the right to do so.

    For discussion purposes only.





    Hi JET, you have stated four items and I will enumerate my response respectively;

    1.) Both professions were also given the right to sign structural documents before RA9266.However in 2003,the UAP and PICE made an agreement to delineate both professions.Most Architects simply want the PICE to HONOR this agreement like professionals.In RA9266,interior designers are given recognition and we can no longer design movable interior objects.Interior designing is more into the detailed interior material considerations of the project.I know this because I work with them in some of my projects.
    The purpose of RA9266 is the separation of the various professions,the architects,the interior designers,the civil engineers,etc. so that each professional can earn based on their field of expertise without killing the livelihood of another.


    2.) We have design subjects up to 5th year.That is Design 1 up to Design 10 ,we also study the history of architecture per country and per era,plus we have structural subjects up to ultimate strength design.The portal method,method of joints,three moment equations are not mysteries to an architect.Our professors are STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS who took their master degrees overseas.We have subjects pertaining to construction methods,electrical systems,lighting systems,sanitary systems,mechanical systems and acoustical systems yet because of the 2003 agreement,Architects abandoned structural design.ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN is a very deep subject.It is symbolic of the achievement of civilization since the beginning of time.Basic is never enough to fully grasp its true spirit and meaning.


    3.)The rights of the interior designer are recognized in RA9266,most architects only want PICE to honor the agreement 🙂


    4.)As I have said before,the practice of any profession is a PRIVILEGE never a RIGHT.That goes to all professions.There maybe some architects who are good at structural design and some civil engineers who are good at architectural designing but if both want to cross field they both need both PRC licenses to practice it.


    Architects can do structural plans and we have civil engineering subjects up to Ultimate Strength Design but we never venture into that field because we RESPECT your specialization.You don’t have subjects concerning the FIRE CODE (RA9514), BUILDING CODE (PD 1096) and several other important college subjects which are necessary to safeguard the interest and safety of the public in terms of DESIGN.Whenever I have a small residential project,I would never forget to hire or recommend to the Owner to get a Civil/Structural Engineer to design the structural systems of the house.I thoroughly believe it is less expensive for the Owner to hire the necessary professionals for each field of specialization because he will save in the long run.It is like seeing the future implications of the project at least ten years ahead of time.The owner could save thousands even millions of pesos of back jobs if they truly understand the value of each professional,the Architects for the Architectural plans,the Interior Designers for the Interior of the house,the Civil Engineers for the Structural Designs,the Electrical Engineers for the Electrical Plans,the Mechanical Engineers for the Mechanical Plans,the Sanitary Engineers/Master Plumbers for the Plumbing/Sanitation Design of the building.All professions need to earn a living based on their SPECIALIZATIONS not just a single profession enjoying the privilege of all.We are all allied professionals to make our Nation a better place to live.

  19. JET

    I would like to comment on what you have stated above.

    1. I think you are mislead by the joint report/resolution that has happened on 2003. Delineating was not discuss but the act of declaring full support in passing the bill for the civil and for architects.
    We cannot say that they delineate responsibility for both CE’s and Architects because this was not discussed on the proper co-rum.

    Both bill is different. The CE bill is for the CE and does not supersede any provisions in the Architectural Bill. They are independent of one another.

    2. I think we do not need to argue on this because we both agree on the different specialization of the two profession. But I can say is that the CE had training for basic design of architectural and Architect’s had also basic design knowledge for structural.

    3. CE’s honor only the Law intended to us Civil Engineers.

    Republic Act No. 544*
    (As Amended by R.A. 1582)
    An Act to Regulate the Practice of Civil Engineering in the Philippines
    Approved, June 17, 1950 (As amended by R.A. No. 1582, approved on June 16, 1956).

    We are not affected by your Law because it is not intended to us. We have a separate law that gives us the right to design architectural plans.

    4. In this case were are not crossing field, we have the right and privileges to do so.

    I would like you to read all the January 5, 2012 decision of the Court of Appeals regarding this isolationist ideas of Architect’s so that you might be enlighten of all facts.
    If you have an open mind you will understand my point.

    For discussion purposes only.



    4.) I have read the CA decision but I think the UAP had filed already an appeal over the Supreme Court.Only the decision of the Supreme Court would answer this predicament.I have an open mind and in the case that CEs wont give up architectural design,its only fair if architects regain the power to do the structural analysis like before 2003.Anyway,its just my opinion and it does not represent the ideals of architects as a whole.In that case,everybody is happy and theres nothing to argue.

  21. JET

    1. Yup already read the link. This means that both parties have their own version of their bill.
    But it does not indicate what was discussed because there are no minutes of meeting posted.
    We can just stipulated on the facts that there is a meeting and they just agree on the common goal on declaring their support on the passing of both bills.

    2. Yup lets wait and see what will happen next. Will wait in the final decision and hopefully whatever the outcome both parties will accept and respect the decision of the courts.

    For discussion purposes only.



      I agree with you on that one Jet.Lets just wait and hope the world will not END on 2012.Anyway in the real practice,its not your profession which will give you success.It will depend on the individual.(remember that mga arki students)
      Thanks for the discussion 🙂

  22. Glenn

    Can CE’s sign mechanical, electrical, and ECE layout plans, Do a civil engineer know how to use a electric tester? Do a civil engineer do the ACU? Do you suck the pozo negro? Do you know how to repair a electrical outlet? Simple as that..I’m a licensed architect you should know how to adapt to new laws, because if you step on the other courses, you are very greedy and corrupt. @ JET, please know your limits, you are not invisible that even medicine and law courses you can conquer. In short you are afraid of check and balance to your work mistakes!!!

    • JET

      Dear Mr. Glenn,

      Please be guided on the topic at hand. It is on the structural and architectural design which both courses have in common.
      I think your mechanical, electrical and ece layouts is immaterial on the topic. We can also ask you the same question but I did not because it is not logical.
      Don’t stipulate that I am corrupt & greedy and you don’t not know me personally maybe you are but not me.
      Please read the comments above thoroughly before you react.
      I think also with legal matters you don’t know a thing, please read on laws that cannot circumvent existing laws which is in conflict with the others.
      Don’t you worry I am a Licensed Civil Engineer also with a Master’s Degree.
      I have also a background experiences in arbitration cases if you want further discussion.
      Finally who is afraid, not me. I think you are afraid of you own ghost.
      Maybe you are afraid that we can design architectural drawings even on a simple design.
      We know our limits and hope you know also yours…

      For discussion purposes only…. :))

  23. The world will become fair…Kapag may Architect ng nagdedesign ng bridge at dam…dalhin pa hanggang subways!hehehehe

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: