Landscape Architects and the right to submit storm water plans in Florida

[Mark Lerch]

True or False
RLA’s in the State of Florida can sign and seal stormwater plans for approval?
The answer depends on where you are in Florida.
While the Department of Environmental Protection has recognized the right of landscape architects to submit storm water plans it has not impressed this on the Water management districts responsible for processing storm water plans.
In light of the momemtum to integrate low impact development practices and bio retention swales and phytoremediation into our communities it seems to me that the landscape architects are really missing out some significant opportunities to promote what we practice.
How many landscape architects practicing in Florida were aware of this? How many are interested in seeing this change. Since this is already legislated it doesn’t seem like petitoning our representatives will help. Anyone out there have any ideas on how we can organize to make this change?

[nca]

This is interesting Mark.

For my own educational purposes (and to bump an important topic), how do you see Landscape Architects in comparison to engineers with regard to skill sets in developing the best stormwater plans? What gives the LA the advantage and why should LA’s take this initiative?

Is the engineer not appropriately qualified to perform these tasks?

Thanks for a potentially interesting topic! I hope we can get some more experienced professionals involved with this.

[Mark Lerch]

Nick, thanks for the questions. I don’t necessarily think engineers are not qualified to do stormwater plans. Clearly they have been doing them and are adept at meeting stormwater requirements designated by the water management districts. I review landscape plans for commercial developments on a daily basis and I frequently see plans that are overbuilt and fail to provide sufficient room for landscape buffers (the stormwater pond goes right to the property line). I rarely see examples of low impact development practices. Most engineers we work with still prefer to raise the curbs and channel all stormwater directly to a retention facility on the site. Landscape architects could easily provide the same services the engineers are providing and integrate the functions of stormwater management into the site design. I believe the landscape architects could re-assert themselves in the role of site design by taking control of this and being allowed to design the stormwater plans. Currently it seems that most landscape architects are brought on board only after the site design process is complete and stormwater approval has already been granted. Failing to execise their right to perform to the limits granted by the State of Florida only diminishes the role that landscape architects play in determining the best alternatives for a site and deprives a client of our services. Many landscape architects work in engineering offices or are in mutual symbiosis with engineers so I can see why they might be reluctant to promote themselves in this area. Really our chapter and board are responsible for how little has been done to protect the rights of landscape architects to practice as provided in the statute, 481 part II. However it doesn’t seem that much is happening there. I know there are individuals that have spent a great amount of time and money to pursue this ( on the landscape architecture side) and I thought that this would be a great place to shine some more light on the topic. I am hoping that others will see the benefits of being able to be more than embellishers of engineer’s site plans. By the time a site has its storm water designed the design is 90% complete.

[nca]

Interesting.

I’ve worked in offices totally devoid of PE’s, entirely focused on design and offices where the LA’s literally rubbed elbows with the PE’s day in, day out.

What has intrigued me is comparison of our professional relationship with civils and the architects relationship with structurals. It has been discussed as to how LA’s should interface with related professions. One conclusion was that licensing rights should be abandoned in lieu of a free practice approach where which ever professional can perform the most effective service is awarded the work.

Regardless of how unrealistic you may think this sounds, in many instances, I think LA’s would be at an advantage to providing more comprehensive services, though unfortunately I think some of the most vital aspects of the landscape architecture practice are the most difficult to quantify.

I know there are some LA’s which frequently contribute here who work closely with civils and may have a different outlook.

[Mark Lerch]

Hi Andrew, first, thank you for your contribution to this thread.
In the State of Florida, in the Southwest Florida Water Management District, a developer doesn’t even have the choice to use a landscape architect to prepare the stormwater plans. This is in a state that recognizes landscape architects as being qualified to prepare stormwater plans. The question I am really asking, not overtly, is why has this been accepted by the majority of landscape architects that work in this district or others in Florida that have adopted similar exclusionary rules? They don’t know? They would prefer to foster better relationships with the engineers? They are not comfortable with storm water plans? Not everyone is happy that landscape architects have been prohibited from this and they have put a lot of work, over 20 years, and made great sacrifices to try and change this. I think that the internet has great potential to bring their efforts to light and gain support for something that I feel they have not vainly toiled. If L.A.’s are not allowed a seat at the table we can’t even consider how much work they will get doing stormwater plans or how they are perceived by developers.

We do require vegetative buffers. Most of the time it is considered to be an undue burden to reject a plan for a buffer violation after thousands of dollars have been invested in plans and design and the water management district has already granted approval. In a county that is pro-development and dollars are drying up there is little support from administration to hold a project up for landscaping buffers.

Is your phone ringing off the hook? I have yet to stamp my first plan. I also hope it is a run off drainage plan. I better brush up on my storm water calcs.

We can’t begin to educate the consumers when we are sabotaged by regulatory agencies with what I see as exclusionary and unlawful policies. Clearly the person who consulted you for your first plan at least hadn’t been told the plan wouldn’t be accepted by the agency or municipality or he wouldn’t have paid you.

Let me know if you find an answer to the errors and omissions insurance question.

[Mark Lerch]

You are not dumb or uniformed, Jennifer. You are right on. There is no advantage in being complacent about the diminshing role landscape architects are being resigned to. It is essential to the future of our practice that landscape architects exercise the rights we have to their limits. While we can equivocate about how much business we stand to gain from alienating other professionals while preserving our practice, there is no question that allowing our practice to be marginalized by those professionals will only decrease the options clients have for using our skills. Please stay involved with this. Both you and Andrew have described how we are of value because developers are required to use our services but on the flip side if the developers are prohibited from using our services, because an approving agency has drafted a rule that only recognizes one professional out of many that would be qualified, the developers are denied the freedom to choose in the first place. If you want to voice your support with the Florida chapter, I would recommend contacting the Government Affairs Chair, Mr. Shawn Kalbi. I don’t think that gerrymandering by other professions to restrict competition is unusal. I am sure that this happens with Physical therapists and chiropracters and general practicioners in the medical fields. Now I know why lobbiests are so important in our system, as much as I disdain the special interest group influence over policy and government. We only have the ASLA in our corner so we really need to let them know how important this issue is to our practice so they understand how much of their resources they need to devote to this particular issue.

[Mark Lerch]

Florida has a specific section of the LARE that it requires candidates pass prior to becoming licensed. It covers many areas but not specifically grading and drainage.

You are correct about the question of whether local goverment agencies have the right to elevate the standards of submittal to the exclusion of all statute qualified professionals except one. I am going to be speaking with a county attorney about this as soon as I get the opportunity to meet with one I have already contacted. One L.A. that has been doing a lot of work on this said that it is possible that if the Water Management Districts are illegally prohibiting the practice rights of a profession, by also doing so the local governments could be liable for conspiracy.

I would like to know from other landscape architects in Florida on the Land8lounge what their thoughts on this are. I don’t know if they feel there is extra liability or if they feel that it is a necessary evil if they are going to continue to get work from the engineers they depend on. One L.A. I spoke with, who is a Fellow, informed me that the engineers in his office just wouldn’t understand why it is important that L.A.’s be allowed to design stormwater plans.

[Author]

Posts