Legislature(1997 - 1998)
04/15/1997 01:38 PM Senate L&C
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 110 LICENSING OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
CHAIRMAN LEMAN announced SB 110 to be up for consideration.
SENATOR MACKIE, sponsor, said he would prefer to hear testimony at
this time.
MS. KATHY GARDNER, President, Alaska Professional Design Council,
said that landscape architects are an integral part of the design
process and it's important that they be on a parallel professional
level with other design professionals. Architects and engineers
are currently responsible for certifying life and safety in areas
in which they are not educated specifically, such areas as
playgrounds, plantings in rights-of-way, and planting in view
triangles at intersections. Licensure will ensure that landscape
architects are professionally responsible for those portions of
work that they design removing the liability incurred by other
design professions.
She added that most states in the lower 48 recognize landscape
architects as a professional group. Federal contracting requires
licensed landscape architects and that has impacted Alaskan
landscape architects preventing them from pursuing some federal
work in Alaska or maintaining licenses from outside.
MR. DUAYNE ADAMS, landscape architect, said they work parallel to
engineers, architects, and land surveyors. It is listed by request
for proposal, they fill out the standard form for qualification for
professional services, and they enter into professional services
agreements. He noted that 45 other states require licensure
especially on federal projects. He said there are also certified
safety issues as well, like view triangles in highway rights-of-way
and playgrounds. MR. ADAMS said that wetland design, treatment of
storm water, knowledge of the survival of plant materials, and the
requirements of manufactured materials is very important for
ensuring that water quality and public infrastructure are
protected.
As an owner of a landscape architecture firm, he is very concerned
about the business aspects of licensure. They are at a
disadvantage competing on several works. In the neighborhood of $1
- $2 million worth of work over the last four years has gone to
out-of-state firms, like the Mendenhall Glacier Visitor Center,
Mendenhall Glacier Campground, Glacier Bay Employee Housing, and
the Denali Hotel, to name a few.
The Board said in a letter that they do generally support landscape
architecture for licensure, but that this bill needed more work and
appointed an individual to work with. They have worked with that
individual and he has stated that everything appears to be in
order.
MR. CHRISTOPHER MERTL, President-elect, Alaska Chapter, American
Society of Landscape Architects, said he lived in a lot of places
and everywhere he's been there's been licensing of landscape
architects. One of the main issues is that they design public
spaces. They are not gardeners and tree planters; they design
outdoor spaces for people. Everything seen from a building out is
often designed by a landscape architect. These are spaces that
everybody uses every day. He said that landscape architects are
not licensed and are disadvantaged when it comes to getting
contracts in-state which means that Alaskan dollars and jobs are
being lost to outside states. With no state minimum for landscape
architects there's the possibility of a wide variety of individuals
with varied education and experience designing these used spaces.
MR. MERTL explained that they go through the same education process
as engineers and architects. They go to university for five years
and often do an internship of two - three years; and then they have
to pass a series of national exams. In conclusion, he said he
supported SB 110.
Number 322
MS. CATHERINE REARDON, Director, Division of Occupational
Licensing, said several people had seen her over the past two years
on this legislation and she appreciated their attempts to address
her concerns. Her personal preference would be a title restriction
rather than a mandatory licensure law because she is unsure whether
the public health and safety risks of unlicensed landscape
architecture warrants prohibition against people performing some of
the scopes of practice that are in the bill.
She liked the provisions allowing her to spread the costs of the
program equally among the licensees so that the landscape
architect's costs will be reasonable. She also liked the language
allowing the board, through regulations, to make the determinations
that some activities do not require licenses because of low public
health and safety risk. She was also concerned whether there would
be a sufficient number of landscape architects available in the
State to cover the scopes of practice in the more remote areas.
CHAIRMAN LEMAN asked if she objected to his amendment allowing the
name of the board to stay the same, but to allow the practice of
landscape architects to be incorporated under that board. MS.
REARDON said she had no objection at all.
CHAIRMAN LEMAN said there were two other substantive amendments.
MS. REARDON said she was familiar with them from the last
legislature. She said her concern was that it seemed that the
boundaries between the professions were confusing.
CHAIRMAN LEMAN responded that he thought there might be some
overlap, for instance, her example of road embankments, and he
wouldn't want to preclude anyone from doing that if it fell within
the scope of their services and that's why he wanted the clarifying
amendment.
MS. REARDON asked if the Chairman thought doing landscaping around
a building was generally thought to be within the scope of
architecture. CHAIRMAN LEMAN answered that generally that would be
in architecture or landscape architecture, but drainage was in the
area of engineering.
Number 400
MS. JEAN SMITH, staff to Senator Mackie, explained the main change
to the proposed CS was on page 14, lines 5 - 16 essentially
eliminated the addition of a permanent voting landscape architect
to the board. This would not only eliminate the fiscal impact a
permanent member would have, but would meet their intent to have a
landscape architect as a resource person during the initial
regulation process.
SENATOR KELLY said he would support that in the interests of
getting them up and running. He moved to adopt the CS to SB 110.
There were no objections and it was so ordered.
SENATOR KELLY moved to adopt conceptual amendment #1 wherever the
board is referenced by name to delete the words "and landscape
architects." SENATOR MACKIE objected saying that's what the bill
does, put them in the board. CHAIRMAN LEMAN explained that the
function would still be in there. SENATOR MACKIE asked why he
wanted to take them out. CHAIRMAN LEMAN answered because that is
the existing name and it just lengthened it. All six disciplines
within engineering aren't listed either. Furthermore, they checked
with legal drafting and there is no legal reason to not do it.
SENATOR MACKIE removed his objection. There were no further
objections and it was so adopted.
CHAIRMAN LEMAN explained that amendment #2 added a paragraph to
section 23 saying, "This chapter does not prohibit the practice of
landscape architecture by a person who is not registered to
practice landscape architecture, if the services being performed by
the person are within the scope of practice authorized by another
license that is held by the person."
SENATOR KELLY commented that this was discussed three years ago and
was to protect landowners who hire people to mow grass in the
summer time.
SENATOR MACKIE moved to adopt amendment #2. There were no
objections and it was so adopted.
CHAIRMAN LEMAN explained that amendment #3 added subparagraph (c)
that says, "Notwithstanding the definition of the practice of
landscape architecture in AS08.48.341 a registered landscape
architect may not perform or offer to perform a service described
in AS08.48.341.17 if that service also requires registration as an
architect or engineer unless the landscape architect is also
registered as an architect or engineer as applicable.
SENATOR MACKIE asked how they can do it now without this language.
SENATOR KELLY said that at one time he thought landscape
architecture was trying to get into engineering areas. He said he
wasn't sure of the language, but for today's purpose he moved to
adopt amendment #3.
CHAIRMAN LEMAN announced an at ease from 2:12 - 2:14 p.m.
Number 463
MR. DUAYNE ADAMS commented that in talking with Catherine Reardon,
he was concerned that it read that any other design profession can
do landscape architecture, but landscape architects can't do what
others can do. So that left a lot of room for interpretation and
in essence the standard of practice is really based on education
and what a professional has been taught and can take liability for.
He saw no more grey area than exists between architects and
structural engineers and that has been a peaceable existence for
some time. This issue is already covered adequately by the
standards of professional practices as well as existing licensure
law. He recommends that the committee not adopt this amendment
because it does open those questions that Ms. Reardon is concerned
with.
CHAIRMAN LEMAN asked that he be allowed to withdraw the amendment.
SENATOR KELLY said his only concern is if the person who comes to
his house this summer to mow his lawn and do a little bit of
gardening is allowed to do that. CHAIRMAN LEMAN responded that he
thought that was covered in amendment #2.
MR. ADAMS said there is a specific provision in the legislation
that says the practice of landscape architecture only covers those
areas that are within the purview of public health and safety.
This does not preclude a gardener from doing anything as long as
it's not a threat to public health and safety.
CHAIRMAN LEMAN announced that hearing no objection, amendment #3
was withdrawn and he said the last amendment was #4 and noted that
it was on page 12, line 2 to be consistent with legislation they
have already moved. There were no objections, and amendment #4
passed.
SENATOR MACKIE moved to pass CSSB 110(L&C) with individual
recommendations. There were no objections and it was so ordered.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|