DocketNumber: JM-217
Judges: Jim Mattox
Filed Date: 7/2/1984
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 2/18/2017
. The Attorney General of Texas Cfctober 24, 1984 JIM MATTOX Attorney General Mr. Philip D. Cm?::, PAIA Opinion No. JM-217 Supreme Court Buitdina P. 0. Box 12548 Executive Directo.: Austin. TX. 7871% 254S The Texas Board of Architectural Re: Authority of a landscape 512,4752501 Examiners architect under article 249c. Telex 9101874-1367 8213 Shoal Creek :3:Lvd., Suite 107 V.T.C.S. Telecopier 51214750268 Auetln. Texas 7W58 714 Jxkson. Suite 700 Dear Mr. Creer: Dallas. TX. 752024505 2141742-8944 You ask whet,ter the landscape architect for the city of Corpus Christ1 Mayo 4824 Alberta Ave.. Suite 150 El Paso, TX. 799052793 develop detailed plans and specificatloas for 915/5333484 retainill!! walls, park shelters, decks, viewing platfonw, elevated boardwalks, etc. under the 001 Texas. suits 700 definit ton of the practice of landscape Houston, TX. 77002.3111 archite,::ure as set out in article 249c. V.T.C.S. 713/22%5M8 We conclude that a landscape architect may not develop plans and specifications fcmr such structures when their preparation requires SO8 Broadway, Suite 312 Lubbock. TX. 79401.3479 skills vhich fall within the definitions of the practices of 8081747.5238 engineering, archL:ecture, or public surveying. Whether the design or construction of 4~ particular improvement constitutes an exercise of engineering, archlzecture, or public surveying is a question dependent 4309 N. Tsnth. Suite B McAllen. TX. 78501-1585 upon the facts of azach case. This office is not authorized to resolve 512/882.45d7 such matters in t:w opinion process. The practice of landscape architecture. defined In article 249c. 200 Main Plus. Suite ro0 section 1 (b) , includes the San Antonlo. TX. 78205.2797 512/2254191 preparat:Lon of . . . detailed design plans, studies L specifications, and responsible An Equal Opparlunityl supervialon in connection with the development of Affirmative Action Emplow land awas where, and to the extent that, the princip,*l purpose of such service is to arrange and modify the effects of natural scenery for aesthetl,: effect, considering the use to which the land i:; to be put. Such services concern the arrangammt of natural forms, features, and plantings. including the ground and water forms, vegetat Loa. circulation. walks, and other landsca ?a~ features to fulfill aesthetic and p. 972 Mr. Philip D. Creer - Page ;I (JM-217) functional requirments but shall not include any services or funct:lona within the definition of the practice of eng&eering, uublic surveying, or architecture as duliined by the laws of this state. (Emphasis added). In light of this definiticn. your question Is In essence whether a landscape architect may perform the aforementioned services without engaging in the practice:1 of engineering. public surveying, or architecture. The practice of enginefc?ing is defined as any service or cr’r;%tive work . . . the performance of which requires engineering education, training and experience ln the application of special knowledge of th: mathematical, physical, or engineering sciences to such services or creative work. V.T.C.S. art. 3271a. §2(4). Public surveying is the practice of “determining the boundaries or the topography of real property or of delineating routes, spaces, or sites in real property” by the use of “relevant elements of law * research, measurement. analysis, computation, mapping, and land description writing.” V.T.C.S. art. 5282c, $2(l). The practiw of architecture is defined in article 249a. section 10(a). V.T.C.S., as any service or creative work . . . applying the art and science of developing design concepts, planning for functional relationships and intended uses, and estahl.ishing the form, appearance, aesthetics, and construction details, for any building or buildings, or environs, to be constructed, enl.arged or altered, the proper application of which requires architectural education. training and experience. The statutes regulat:lng the practices of engineering, public _ . surveying, and architecture each contain language expressing the objective of safeguarding life, health, property and public welfare. See V.T.C.S. arts. 249a. IL; 3271a, 11.1; 5282~‘ $3. Article 249c ztains no such language!; we do not, however, infer any lesser concern for the public from this omission. The statutes regulating engineering, public surveying, and architecture reflect the state’s overriding interest in px,cmoting safety and competence in design, measurement, and construction while discouraging confusion and deception of the public b>, unlicensed practitioners. See Parrish v. Phillips.401 S.W.2d 347
I,‘l’ex. Civ. App. - Houston 1966. writ ref’d n.r.e.); Farha v. Elam, 3(;5 S.W.Zd 692 (Tex. Civ. App. - Fort Worth p. 973 Mr. Philip D. Creer - Page 3 (JM-217) 1964. writ ref’d n.r.e.); Habry v. Prime=, 333 S.W.Zd 684 (Tex. Civ. APP. - Houeton 1960). $?. onL other grounds.338 S.W.2d 704
(Tex. 1960). We believe that 4ZIcle 249c promotes corresponding interests. -See Attorney General Opinion R-814 (1976). The laws pertaining to the practice of the four professions discussed in this opinior~ each provide exemptions for certain individuals othervise satlaf!ying the requirements of regulation. See V.T.C.S. arts. 249s. 110; i49c. 16; 3271a. 121; 5282~. 04. Arti= 249c, section 2, exempts professional engineers, land surveyors, and architects from the provisions of the act. Landscape architects, on the other hand, are not er,empted from compliance with articles 249a, 3271a. snd 5282~. As a goneral matter, the creation of a statutory exception by the 1egislatu::c “makes plain the intent that the statute should apply in all cssel not excepted.” State v. Richards,301 S.W.2d 597
. 600 (Tex. 1957). It has been suggested :hst landscape architects may be permitted to perform services within t,he practices of engineering, architecture. and public surveying as long as they do not represent themselves to the public as members of those professions or employ the titles of the respective professions. It is true that lo Attorney General Opinion R-814 (1976) this office concluded that non-licensed persons could perform services involving ,zlements of landscape architecture as long as they did not hold thenselves out as landscape architects. This conclusion though, was predicated on the applicability of the exemptions contained in article 249c. Similarly. In Attorney General Opinion M-545 (1969). this office held that certain structural designs could be prepared by pertcns not registered under article 3271a as long as they do not represent that they are licensed and registered. This conclusion, too, presumed the applicability of exemptions contained in article 327:``. With regard to landscape architects, there is no exemption upt’c, which we may rely. Accordingly, it has been concluded on prior occasions that landscape architects are not excused, by agreement or otlervise, from the licensing requirements of statutes from which they are not specifically excepted. Attorney General Opinions E-890 (1976); H-495 (1975). The question you ask does not require a diffewnt answer. On the contrary, because the services in question are to be performed for the city of Corpus Christi, we answer your question in the negative. See, e.g., art. 3271a. 919 (plans and specifications for any public work whose cost exceeds $3000 must be p::c!pared by and construction supervised by registered professional engineer). SUMMARY A landscape architect may not, under the definition of :.andscape architecture, develop detailed plans and specifications for certain structures when their preparation requires skills p. 974 hr. Philip D. Crcer - Page 4 (JM-217) which fall withjo, the practices of engineering, public surveying, or architecture. Whether the development of much plans and specifications constitutes au csercise of engineering, public surveying, or a::t:hitecture is a factual matter that this office i.s not authorized to resolve. i JIM MATTOX Attorney General of Texas TOMGREEN First Assistant Attorney Gweral DAVID R. RICRARDS Executive Assistant Attorney General . RICK GILPIN Chairman, Opinion Committe~r Prepared by Rick Gilpia Assistant Attorney General APPROVED: : OPINION COMWITTEE Rick Gilpin, Chairman Colin Carl Susan Garrison Jim Moellinger Nancy Sutton p. 975