PcM Who retains the civil engineer? The architect or the owner?

Practice Management
1

@kiaragalicinao @coachchrishopstock @coachthomasmasino @coachbriannakeller

I came across a question in a case study which asks: In addition to structural and mechanical engineers, what other consultants should the firm consider retaining for this project?

One of the correct answers was a civil engineer.

This answer completely shocked me! I was certain that the owner retains the civil engineer. I knew that Article 1.1.9 of the B101 says that ‘the owner shall retain the following consultants and contractors’ and number 2 lists civil engineer as one of them. Therefore, I eliminated this as a possible correct answer (with confidence!) :roll_eyes:. This sent me down the rabbit hole and now I question everything I have ever learned about Practice Management.

Since this earth shattering moment, I have discovered a chart in the AHPP on page 605 (Figure 10.3) which appears to indicate that the architect can retain a civil engineer. Also, civil engineering is listed as a supplemental service in the B101 (4.1.1.8). This brings up the question of whether this means that the architect will provide civil engineering as a supplemental service in-house or whether the architect will retain a civil engineer as a consultant to provide civil engineering as a supplemental service?

Of course, there is nothing stopping the architect from retaining a civil engineer under 4.1.1.29 ‘Other services provided by specialty consultants’ or 4.1.1.30 ‘Other supplemental services’ in the B101. So, technically, the architect can, in fact, hire a civil engineer.

Why then, does the B101 specifically list a civil engineer under the owner’s purview in the Initial Information portion of the B101, when a civil engineer could easily be included in 3. Other, if any (List any other consultants and contractors retained by the Owner.), especially given that it is entirely possible that an architect could hire one?

What say you, oh, wise Black Spectacles’ moderators?

2

did anyone reply here?

3

@hamssaz Not yet. I’m still waiting. :watch:

4

Hi @Citrillion & @hamssaz,

Thank you for your patience in our response. This is a great question and brings up an important consideration - ARE scenarios do not always align perfectly with real life practice (and vice versa). The practice of architecture, in general, is not so ‘black and white’ - there are many instances that are up to interpretation and outcomes could vary depending on given factors in a scenario.

In regard to retaining a civil engineer:

  1. This is the responsibility of the owner by default (per B101 § 1.1.9). This is because a civil engineer is responsible for site grading, utilities connections, roads/curbs, drainage, etc. - site-related issues that often precede the building design, so it makes sense to be the owner’s responsibility.
  2. Alternatively, if the owner does not retain a civil engineer, the architect may agree to provide it as a supplemental service (per B101 § 4.1.1.8) either with in-house staff or by hiring a consultant. This does not contradict the default arrangement in # 1; it is simply an alternate scenario to provide flexibility depending on the project factors and stakeholder preferences.

AHPP Figure 10.3 represents possible consultant relationships, rather than strict contractual mandates. Again, contractual relationships can vary depending on the specific project.

The case study question that you’re asking about may have indicated specific considerations that would point to the architect retaining the civil engineer, rather than the owner. If you could provide me with the five-digit item ID (located at the bottom right corner of your screen when viewing the question), I can look into it and provide you with further explanation.

Kiara Galicinao, AIA, NCARB
Product Coordinator
Black Spectacles