Small Project Design

This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Small Project Practitioners and Practice Management Member Conversations .
-------------------------------------------
Now that I've gotten your attention, I would like to start a dialogue, an on-line brainstorming session or sorts to discuss what are the most critical issues facing architects today.

This is not a new subject; however, it has not been as widely discussed as it could be. 

There are many voices amidst our community that are saying the same thing only in different ways and in different communities.  Thus, what better place to come together, from the expedience of our own computers, to discuss the issues that matter most to us?


Most of us, based on articles I've read and seminars I've attended, seem to agree that the role of architects is changing due to a variety of forces. 

In this discussion, I'd like to ask you, based on your unique experience and perspective, what do you think are the most critical issues/obstacles/challenges facing the architecture profession today?  Do you agree that the profession is in trouble?  If so, in what ways?

Please prioritize what you think are the most vital issues that need to be addressed and in what overall direction do you see the profession headed amidst globalization in every facet of the word?

Once we've identified the problems, I'd like for this discussion to also be a place for ideas, solutions, innovations and collaborative sharing.

I have started a blog on this same topic and wanted to mention it here in hopes to increase the disussion and begin a brainstorming session on how we can improve our profession.  Link to blog:

Mos

http://network.aia.org/AIA/AIA/Blogs/BlogViewer/Default.aspx?BlogKey=ba0f2dc0-51a6-4aab-8a5f-f3e66c35b6ad



-------------------------------------------
Tara Imani AIA
Principal
Tara Imani Designs, LLC
Houston TX
-------------------------------------------

It's quite clear that Finance Reform is crucial to our profession. When banks run their businesses into the ground with a safety net of tax payer bailouts, a person's ability to get a mortgage becomes scarce and therefore we lose our shirts. We saw this in the 90s with the S&L bailouts and recently with the Great Recession.

I don't believe the profession is approaching extinction. That question has been asked every decade I've been in practice (approaching 40 years now). I see good work out there all the time.

Mr. Rawlings' post makes some excellent points.  We have a lot to offer even the "mass market", using even the simplest principles learned early on in college. Despite what I can observe as numerous examples of good residential architecture, I'm not convinced the "mass market" is getting any better in an overall sense. In terms of energy consumption, the answer I believe is "yes". There are other issues, however. I'm disappointed by oversized homes, a result of over-consumption, and the inclination to look at a home as an "investment". Real estate speculation exacerbates the issue.

I'm using the term "mass market" rather loosely, and it's not meant as a putdown. It does get a lot of people in homes at reasonable  prices, who otherwise wouldn't have a home.

Our profession has been aided by government regulation, adding complexity to a process that used to be relatively simple back in the 1960s. The process has become too complicated, especially here in California. Someone once described the "new economy" as "information intensive". That would certainly describe the LEED process. It would be nice to see some macro statistics from reliable sources, to let us know if all all this  extra effort is producing real efficiencies, or if all we are doing is keeping a small army of technocrats and bureaucrats employed.

I agree with Mr. Rawlings that we need a greater presence in the residential sector. I don't like the idea of legislating such a presence, unless it is clearly part of government's mandate to protect the public's "health, safety, and welfare" (an expression that can be debated endlessly). I don't have any ideas on how to make our presence greater. After 40 years of practice, the problem seems to be the same: not enough of the public sees the value of our work.

Yes, we need financial reform. I don't look to the government to do much about it, however. One can legislate endlessly. Some of it will do some good, but it doesn't take long for those who make money off of money to find new financial games to play. There's an "end around" every effort to correct these periodic financial crises, given enough time. This is not to denigrate the legislative process; it takes a great deal of wisdom to strike the right balance, and more legislation isn't always better. The real solutions to these problems lie within each one of us as individuals. Some pundit who's name escapes me once said "Don't confuse money with wealth". We have Ivy League graduates who haven't figured that out yet.

-------------------------------------------
Craig Bagley AIA
Owner
Craig Bagley Architect
Santa Cruz CA
-------------------------------------------

Hi Craig,

I appreciate your thoughtful response to my earlier post.  I agree with you, I too, see great works of architecture being carried out everyday, too. 

Setting aside the sensationalism of the thread title, I am concerned about the high rate of unemployment amongst licensed architects and the lack of new positions available for new graduates.  If we're not facing all-out extinction- which we obviously are not- what we are facing is both underemployment and under-utilization of architectural services, in my opinion.

You have said a few important things that I wanted to respond to:

///I agree with Mr. Rawlings that we need a greater presence in the residential sector. I don't like the idea of legislating such a presence, unless it is clearly part of government's mandate to protect the public's "health, safety, and welfare" (an expression that can be debated endlessly).///

I totally agree with you both that we need a greater presence in the residential sector.

I also like the idea that someone else had brought up on the blog- that is, "if it needs a permit, it needs an architect's stamp."  Why not?  Do we not need to hire an attorney if we want to file a legal action?  And do we not need a doctor's order or signature to obtain medical services or get a prescription filled?  Likewise, the public should need an architect to design and stamp drawings whenever they seek to build a shelter...no matter how small it is (as long as someone's going to be living in it; or storing items/substances/chemicals that require certain design parameters).  I think this is a reasonable, logical point.   Would you agree?
 
///I don't have any ideas on how to make our presence greater. After 40 years of practice, the problem seems to be the same: not enough of the public sees the value of our work.///

Could it be that the public doesn't value our services because we sometimes don't place enough proper value on them ourselves?


///Yes, we need financial reform. I don't look to the government to do much about it, however. One can legislate endlessly.///

I also agree with you that we need financial reform and need it asap.

Donald Trump was interviewed by Greta van Susteran on Fox News a few nights ago.  He was concerned about how the U.S. has allowed a trade deficit with China to erode our economy.  He suggested a 25% tax on all imports coming from China into the U.S.  I think this is a brilliant idea.  As he added, this would help push companies to begin manufacturing those same items over here.  He was referring to the many building products that he purchases in bulk to construct his many projects.  He also mentioned how his friends who travel to China remarked how fantastic the architecture is over there- the brand new airports and public transportation systems compared to the rundown, aging LaGuardia airport and other infrastructure here in the U.S.  He said, "We're starting to look like a "Banana Republic" compared to them!"   Personally, I'm not excited about doing projects for China when our own country is in need of much renovation and rebuilding.  We need to stop and think about this: we are in debt to China up to our eyeballs, yet, we continue to buy most of our goods from China...how can we support this?  It is unsustainable.

///The real solutions to these problems lie within each one of us as individuals.///

I agree with you here; that is well said and so true.  For me personally, I think it is much easier to bounce back from tough times the younger we are; or maybe for moms like me, it's more difficult to juggle an intense job search and/or seek new clients while maintaining a balance between career and home/family. 

///Some pundit who's name escapes me once said "Don't confuse money with wealth". We have Ivy League graduates who haven't figured that out yet.///

So true.  I'm not sure what the point of this statement is, though, relative to this conversation... can you please expound? 

Thank you, again, for your comments Craig.  It is much appreciated.

Sincerely yours,

Tara

-------------------------------------------
Tara Imani AIA
Principal
Tara Imani Designs, LLC
Houston TX
-------------------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: 11-04-2010 15:42
From: Craig Bagley
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

I don't believe the profession is approaching extinction. That question has been asked every decade I've been in practice (approaching 40 years now). I see good work out there all the time.

 

Mr. Rawlings' post makes some excellent points.  We have a lot to offer even the "mass market", using even the simplest principles learned early on in college. Despite what I can observe as numerous examples of good residential architecture, I'm not convinced the "mass market" is getting any better in an overall sense. In terms of energy consumption, the answer I believe is "yes". There are other issues, however. I'm disappointed by oversized homes, a result of over-consumption, and the inclination to look at a home as an "investment". Real estate speculation exacerbates the issue.

 

I'm using the term "mass market" rather loosely, and it's not meant as a putdown. It does get a lot of people in homes at reasonable  prices, who otherwise wouldn't have a home.

 

Our profession has been aided by government regulation, adding complexity to a process that used to be relatively simple back in the 1960s. The process has become too complicated, especially here in California. Someone once described the "new economy" as "information intensive". That would certainly describe the LEED process. It would be nice to see some macro statistics from reliable sources, to let us know if all all this  extra effort is producing real efficiencies, or if all we are doing is keeping a small army of technocrats and bureaucrats employed.

 

I agree with Mr. Rawlings that we need a greater presence in the residential sector. I don't like the idea of legislating such a presence, unless it is clearly part of government's mandate to protect the public's "health, safety, and welfare" (an expression that can be debated endlessly). I don't have any ideas on how to make our presence greater. After 40 years of practice, the problem seems to be the same: not enough of the public sees the value of our work.

 

Yes, we need financial reform. I don't look to the government to do much about it, however. One can legislate endlessly. Some of it will do some good, but it doesn't take long for those who make money off of money to find new financial games to play. There's an "end around" every effort to correct these periodic financial crises, given enough time. This is not to denigrate the legislative process; it takes a great deal of wisdom to strike the right balance, and more legislation isn't always better. The real solutions to these problems lie within each one of us as individuals. Some pundit who's name escapes me once said "Don't confuse money with wealth". We have Ivy League graduates who haven't figured that out yet.

 

 

-------------------------------------------
Craig Bagley AIA
Owner
Craig Bagley Architect
Santa Cruz CA
-------------------------------------------

This most recent near extinction is nothing new for our profession. Most recently we saw a very similar occurrence in the early 90s. I remember job hunting right out of school and hearing the frustrated interviewers really looking for someone with 3-5 years of experience, but they didn't exist. There was a 3-5 year hiring freeze and all they had to pick from were very experienced Architects or greenies fresh out of school.

I like to congratulate Eric for his exquisite words. I fully agree with his point of view and direction for change. Even though I have not been around quite as long, i too have seem similar changes. The solution to the challenge that I offer would go back to the earliest roots of our profession. Look at Egypt and the work of Imhotep. He was the more than the Architect or the builder, he was the "Masterbuilder". This is what we need to morph into in order to ensure that good design prevails, not just in public spaces.

 

Lectures to homeowners, especially on environmental issues, which is the core of my practice, certainly have helped to sway a few to understand and appreciate the need for design at even the "starter home" level. A large campaign from AIA National might be a good idea. More than to glorify the architect and highlight a select few with exceptional work for the public realm, the smaller, less able to advertize firms, usually focusing on residential work, need a bigger voice.

 

A wonderful topic and a excellent direction, this conversation is steering towards.

-------------------------------------------
Sebastian Eilert AIA
Architect
Sebastian Eilert Architecture, Inc.
Miami FL
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 11-08-2010 08:19
From: Eric Rawlings
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

This most recent near extinction is nothing new for our profession. Most recently we saw a very similar occurrence in the early 90s. I remember job hunting right out of school and hearing the frustrated interviewers really looking for someone with 3-5 years of experience, but they didn't exist. There was a 3-5 year hiring freeze and all they had to pick from were very experienced Architects or greenies fresh out of school.

I'm going to hammer this home one more time. Residential, Residential, RESIDENTIAL! The main problem is that average people don't experience the design process of working with a professional Architect. Simply experiencing a wonderful public space isn't good enough! They don't understand the difference of the kind of ideas Architects can offer as opposed to the "easy to build" mentality of the builders who often portray themselves as the superior designers.

Your average person uses a contractor to design their home additions. They use lousy plan books to find new designs like it's a Pottery Barn catalogue. People want to purchase products, not ideas. The speculative house is so popular because it's new, it's finished, it's ready for YOU to move in now! Unfortunately, the builder typically chooses the design and this is the most common delivery method for homes to the public. People really think builders are the most important component to the success of a beautiful building. This is what the real estate agents make you think, as they are working for the spec builder, not the Architect. They are marketing the builder who sells the house and we seem as important as the dry wall sub. A good builder simply follows directions and doesn't try to "improve" the design in mid-construction, but this is what many builders think of as their strength and the reason Architects are obsolete. These are the guys who bring me out to the job site with a problem saying, "I built it JUST LIKE THE DRAWINGS."

The bank's appraisers recognize only the square footage and this is why the McMansion came to be. In order to make more money, the profit motive has been to build more building ONLY! The banks are beginning to recognize certified green buildings as being more valuable, but asking a banker to judge beauty is a frightening prospect. Some jurisdictions will allow house plans stamped by an Architect to bypass certain portions of review, speeding up the process. If requiring a stamp is too hard for this country, perhaps giving incentives would at least encourage some to do the right thing. 

I have said it before and I'll say it again, banks should give more value to a house designed by a local Architect than they do to a house coming from a catalogue of an unknown designer of unknown qualifications. The local Architect has been qualified by the State to practice the art of designing buildings. The local Architect may actually visit the job site, but where is the catalogue? The local Architect typically has a liability insurance policy, unlike the catalogue. The local Architect knows the local geography, weather, material availability, builder ability, snow loads, wind loads, etc. How does a catalogue know all of this? Most of all, how does the catalogue know what the houses next door look like? We've witnessed what happens when you give a builder this choice. It's as if they didn't pay attention to Sesame Street as children.

I think Architects who have established high values for the sales of their buildings should bring more value to a new project than someone who is not established. This motivates us to do a better job and design more "valuable" buildings and to begin establishing what "value" means. Why wouldn't someone want a Gucci House or a Vera Wang addition? Designers bring more value to all items in America, why not houses? There is a big difference between the amateur and the Architect, but the saddest thing is that I meet more resistance from other Architects on this idea than I do from builders. We have a very lousy perception of ourselves and our self defeatist mentality is holding us back more than "they" are.

-------------------------------------------
Eric Rawlings AIA
Owner
Rawlings Design, Inc.
Decatur GA
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-05-2010 02:14
From: Tara Imani
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

Hi Craig,

I appreciate your thoughtful response to my earlier post.  I agree with you, I too, see great works of architecture being carried out everyday, too. 

Setting aside the sensationalism of the thread title, I am concerned about the high rate of unemployment amongst licensed architects and the lack of new positions available for new graduates.  If we're not facing all-out extinction- which we obviously are not- what we are facing is both underemployment and under-utilization of architectural services, in my opinion.

You have said a few important things that I wanted to respond to:

///I agree with Mr. Rawlings that we need a greater presence in the residential sector. I don't like the idea of legislating such a presence, unless it is clearly part of government's mandate to protect the public's "health, safety, and welfare" (an expression that can be debated endlessly).///

I totally agree with you both that we need a greater presence in the residential sector.

I also like the idea that someone else had brought up on the blog- that is, "if it needs a permit, it needs an architect's stamp."  Why not?  Do we not need to hire an attorney if we want to file a legal action?  And do we not need a doctor's order or signature to obtain medical services or get a prescription filled?  Likewise, the public should need an architect to design and stamp drawings whenever they seek to build a shelter...no matter how small it is (as long as someone's going to be living in it; or storing items/substances/chemicals that require certain design parameters).  I think this is a reasonable, logical point.   Would you agree?
 
///I don't have any ideas on how to make our presence greater. After 40 years of practice, the problem seems to be the same: not enough of the public sees the value of our work.///

Could it be that the public doesn't value our services because we sometimes don't place enough proper value on them ourselves?


///Yes, we need financial reform. I don't look to the government to do much about it, however. One can legislate endlessly.///

I also agree with you that we need financial reform and need it asap.

Donald Trump was interviewed by Greta van Susteran on Fox News a few nights ago.  He was concerned about how the U.S. has allowed a trade deficit with China to erode our economy.  He suggested a 25% tax on all imports coming from China into the U.S.  I think this is a brilliant idea.  As he added, this would help push companies to begin manufacturing those same items over here.  He was referring to the many building products that he purchases in bulk to construct his many projects.  He also mentioned how his friends who travel to China remarked how fantastic the architecture is over there- the brand new airports and public transportation systems compared to the rundown, aging LaGuardia airport and other infrastructure here in the U.S.  He said, "We're starting to look like a "Banana Republic" compared to them!"   Personally, I'm not excited about doing projects for China when our own country is in need of much renovation and rebuilding.  We need to stop and think about this: we are in debt to China up to our eyeballs, yet, we continue to buy most of our goods from China...how can we support this?  It is unsustainable.

///The real solutions to these problems lie within each one of us as individuals.///

I agree with you here; that is well said and so true.  For me personally, I think it is much easier to bounce back from tough times the younger we are; or maybe for moms like me, it's more difficult to juggle an intense job search and/or seek new clients while maintaining a balance between career and home/family. 

///Some pundit who's name escapes me once said "Don't confuse money with wealth". We have Ivy League graduates who haven't figured that out yet.///

So true.  I'm not sure what the point of this statement is, though, relative to this conversation... can you please expound? 

Thank you, again, for your comments Craig.  It is much appreciated.

Sincerely yours,

Tara

-------------------------------------------
Tara Imani AIA
Principal
Tara Imani Designs, LLC
Houston TX
-------------------------------------------

There are wonderful ideas being kicked around in this forum.  I hope that someone involved in programming at the AIA National level is listening. 

A few posts have mentioned a need for a campaign at the National level that promotes the value of an architect.  The AIA has good information on the subject posted on the AIA web site, but this isn't sufficient.  AIA National needs to launch a PR campaign that reaches many people, perhaps through TV, radio and social media.   
-------------------------------------------
Cecelia Dillon, NCARB, AIA
Independent Architect
Kansas City, MO
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 11-09-2010 09:23
From: Sebastian Eilert
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

I like to congratulate Eric for his exquisite words. I fully agree with his point of view and direction for change. Even though I have not been around quite as long, i too have seem similar changes. The solution to the challenge that I offer would go back to the earliest roots of our profession. Look at Egypt and the work of Imhotep. He was the more than the Architect or the builder, he was the "Masterbuilder". This is what we need to morph into in order to ensure that good design prevails, not just in public spaces.

 

Lectures to homeowners, especially on environmental issues, which is the core of my practice, certainly have helped to sway a few to understand and appreciate the need for design at even the "starter home" level. A large campaign from AIA National might be a good idea. More than to glorify the architect and highlight a select few with exceptional work for the public realm, the smaller, less able to advertize firms, usually focusing on residential work, need a bigger voice.

 

A wonderful topic and a excellent direction, this conversation is steering towards.

-------------------------------------------
Sebastian Eilert AIA
Architect
Sebastian Eilert Architecture, Inc.
Miami FL
-------------------------------------------

This is the kind of question I've heard often and have even asked myself time and again as I look around at the state of our industry in these tough economic times. And over the last 3 years of this recession, Architects and architecture firms have been going through something of a "rebranding", in the sense that we're faced with finding new ways to market ourselves to clients who perhaps would not normally seek out our services as well as finding new services to offer the traditional clients we do have. Some friends of mine at Content Design Group discovered a new service to offer, it sometimes seems, accidentally. Called the Urban Facelift Project, they began experimenting with derelict buildings in the downtown core of Jacksonville and proposing new facades/uses for them via digital renderings.  This eventually turned into a small design competition hosted by the local Emerging Design Professionals chapter and then into some paid projects for Content Design Group via clients who wanted to "facelift" their homes and/or businesses (you can see some examples on their website).

While I personally think this process of "rebranding" is a good thing for the profession, I also think architects are pushing themselves in the wrong direction.  With each new project that I work on the goal seems to field more and more responsibility AWAY from our profession and into the hands of consultants and/or contractors.  Where previously architects were the Master Builders, at the tip of a very exclusive pyramid, we are now becoming little more than graphic designers for the construction industry.  This is not good.

And I can hear the complaints already: Why should I take on more liability than is necessary?  The obvious answer to this question, in my opinion, is: "It's your project.  You should be taking as much responsibility for it as you can get your hands on because at the end of the day it's your vision for your client becoming reality.  Why wouldn't you want more of the responsibility for the project?"  I can't tell you how many projects I work on where I'm responsible for the envelope only; where the structural system and all support systems are designed solely by the consultants and an interior designer (nothing against interior designers here) is responsible for all finishes, appliances, lighting, etc.  Why is the architect not an important consultant in the design of all these trades or even the DESIGNER?

So, to ask the question again: to what extent is an architect needed in today's society?  The answer is, I think, the architect is needed ever more in today's society.  Architects need to retake their places atop the pyramid as Master Builder's and not just cad jockeys that make pretty pictures for the magazines.  When an architect has to rely on the contractor's insight on a particular detail in the field that the architect did not properly think through, there is a level of prestige, and respect, that is lost by the architect.  Obviously mistakes will happen, and contractors do come up with some very creative solutions in the field (speaking from experience), but it is, and should always be, the role of the architect to step up and take ownership of all aspects of a project from conceptualization to completed construction.  Otherwise the project will suffer, the client will suffer, the architect will suffer and ultimately the profession will suffer.

-------------------------------------------
Jeremiah Russell
Intern Architect
R. Dean Scott, Architect, Inc.
Jacksonville FL
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-09-2010 09:23
From: Sebastian Eilert
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

I like to congratulate Eric for his exquisite words. I fully agree with his point of view and direction for change. Even though I have not been around quite as long, i too have seem similar changes. The solution to the challenge that I offer would go back to the earliest roots of our profession. Look at Egypt and the work of Imhotep. He was the more than the Architect or the builder, he was the "Masterbuilder". This is what we need to morph into in order to ensure that good design prevails, not just in public spaces.

 

Lectures to homeowners, especially on environmental issues, which is the core of my practice, certainly have helped to sway a few to understand and appreciate the need for design at even the "starter home" level. A large campaign from AIA National might be a good idea. More than to glorify the architect and highlight a select few with exceptional work for the public realm, the smaller, less able to advertize firms, usually focusing on residential work, need a bigger voice.

 

A wonderful topic and a excellent direction, this conversation is steering towards.

-------------------------------------------
Sebastian Eilert AIA
Architect
Sebastian Eilert Architecture, Inc.
Miami FL
-------------------------------------------

Hi.  I practice both residential and commerical design, and also build many of the homes I design.  I was trained exclusively to create contemporary designs, but now practice in a wide spectrum of styles.  I think there are a few other factors involved in why we have so little influence in the residential market.  [The following points are gross generalizations and there are plenty of exceptions, but I think these are largely accurate overall.]

) Production housing can build a home at 1/2 the price of the identical custom built home.  Clients are flabbergasted when I tell them how much a custom home costs.  The process of custom home building is not understood by the public.  No matter how good our design, if people are comparing it to production homes (i.e. large developments), which they often are, they will never feel that we give them enough Value.

2) Most architecture schools (including mine -Cornell), teach little about residential or traditional/classical style design.  And when they do, it is without the very important constraints of budget, context and code.  Last year, we deisgned a LEED Platinum home on an infill lot.  It won all sorts of awards, but the neighbors HATED it specifically because it was contemporary in style.  Is it still good design?  I pulled the material palette from the neighborhood and matched the size and rthyme of the surrounding houses.  That's what architecture school mistakenly calls "contextualization".  The neighbors have a different definition - it's mostly about style. 

3) Only a very small portion of the public likes to live in contemporary style homes (alhtough most seem fine with it for commerical and civic structures).  Yet architects are constantly told by magazines, school and awards programs, that the only "real" residential architecture is contemporary.  I don't think we as a profession are willing to acknowledge that this is the reality.  I don't think that what we want to deliver is particularly well calibrated to what the vast majority of the public actually wants.  I think this may be why much of the public sees us as arrogant, and why they don't come to us for their homes.  We've already told them what we like (and what we think they shoudl like), and it's not what they like.

4) Yes, we can educate the public to create greater appreciation for contemporary design, but we should also have a very honest discussion amongst ourselves about why the public so strongly prefers traditional design.
I have my own suspicion that one of the reasons is that contemporary designs, which look so gorgeous in magazines, look far worse when people actually live in them.  The pristine sparcity of the Balthup kitchen or the glass guardrail does not play well with say...children...or pets...or people who might be like me and don't have a full-time maid.  Life is messy and if form follows function, I think a home should be excellently suited to accomodate mess.  Contemporary homes usually do not. 

5) Lastly, we as a nation are really into instant gratification.  Which is why we see homes as products to be bought and moved into next month rather rather than art to be made and moved into next year.  Even our mortgage system is set up to support this; it is far easier and cheaper to get a mortgage to buy a house than to buy land and build a house.  I think this is probably the #1 reason why people don't hire architects and build custom homes.


-------------------------------------------
Scott Rodwin AIA
Principal
Rodwin Architecture
Boulder CO
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 11-08-2010 08:19
From: Eric Rawlings
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

This most recent near extinction is nothing new for our profession. Most recently we saw a very similar occurrence in the early 90s. I remember job hunting right out of school and hearing the frustrated interviewers really looking for someone with 3-5 years of experience, but they didn't exist. There was a 3-5 year hiring freeze and all they had to pick from were very experienced Architects or greenies fresh out of school.

I'm going to hammer this home one more time. Residential, Residential, RESIDENTIAL! The main problem is that average people don't experience the design process of working with a professional Architect. Simply experiencing a wonderful public space isn't good enough! They don't understand the difference of the kind of ideas Architects can offer as opposed to the "easy to build" mentality of the builders who often portray themselves as the superior designers.

Your average person uses a contractor to design their home additions. They use lousy plan books to find new designs like it's a Pottery Barn catalogue. People want to purchase products, not ideas. The speculative house is so popular because it's new, it's finished, it's ready for YOU to move in now! Unfortunately, the builder typically chooses the design and this is the most common delivery method for homes to the public. People really think builders are the most important component to the success of a beautiful building. This is what the real estate agents make you think, as they are working for the spec builder, not the Architect. They are marketing the builder who sells the house and we seem as important as the dry wall sub. A good builder simply follows directions and doesn't try to "improve" the design in mid-construction, but this is what many builders think of as their strength and the reason Architects are obsolete. These are the guys who bring me out to the job site with a problem saying, "I built it JUST LIKE THE DRAWINGS."

The bank's appraisers recognize only the square footage and this is why the McMansion came to be. In order to make more money, the profit motive has been to build more building ONLY! The banks are beginning to recognize certified green buildings as being more valuable, but asking a banker to judge beauty is a frightening prospect. Some jurisdictions will allow house plans stamped by an Architect to bypass certain portions of review, speeding up the process. If requiring a stamp is too hard for this country, perhaps giving incentives would at least encourage some to do the right thing. 

I have said it before and I'll say it again, banks should give more value to a house designed by a local Architect than they do to a house coming from a catalogue of an unknown designer of unknown qualifications. The local Architect has been qualified by the State to practice the art of designing buildings. The local Architect may actually visit the job site, but where is the catalogue? The local Architect typically has a liability insurance policy, unlike the catalogue. The local Architect knows the local geography, weather, material availability, builder ability, snow loads, wind loads, etc. How does a catalogue know all of this? Most of all, how does the catalogue know what the houses next door look like? We've witnessed what happens when you give a builder this choice. It's as if they didn't pay attention to Sesame Street as children.

I think Architects who have established high values for the sales of their buildings should bring more value to a new project than someone who is not established. This motivates us to do a better job and design more "valuable" buildings and to begin establishing what "value" means. Why wouldn't someone want a Gucci House or a Vera Wang addition? Designers bring more value to all items in America, why not houses? There is a big difference between the amateur and the Architect, but the saddest thing is that I meet more resistance from other Architects on this idea than I do from builders. We have a very lousy perception of ourselves and our self defeatist mentality is holding us back more than "they" are.

-------------------------------------------
Eric Rawlings AIA
Owner
Rawlings Design, Inc.
Decatur GA
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-05-2010 02:14
From: Tara Imani
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

Hi Craig,

I appreciate your thoughtful response to my earlier post.  I agree with you, I too, see great works of architecture being carried out everyday, too. 

Setting aside the sensationalism of the thread title, I am concerned about the high rate of unemployment amongst licensed architects and the lack of new positions available for new graduates.  If we're not facing all-out extinction- which we obviously are not- what we are facing is both underemployment and under-utilization of architectural services, in my opinion.

You have said a few important things that I wanted to respond to:

///I agree with Mr. Rawlings that we need a greater presence in the residential sector. I don't like the idea of legislating such a presence, unless it is clearly part of government's mandate to protect the public's "health, safety, and welfare" (an expression that can be debated endlessly).///

I totally agree with you both that we need a greater presence in the residential sector.

I also like the idea that someone else had brought up on the blog- that is, "if it needs a permit, it needs an architect's stamp."  Why not?  Do we not need to hire an attorney if we want to file a legal action?  And do we not need a doctor's order or signature to obtain medical services or get a prescription filled?  Likewise, the public should need an architect to design and stamp drawings whenever they seek to build a shelter...no matter how small it is (as long as someone's going to be living in it; or storing items/substances/chemicals that require certain design parameters).  I think this is a reasonable, logical point.   Would you agree?
 
///I don't have any ideas on how to make our presence greater. After 40 years of practice, the problem seems to be the same: not enough of the public sees the value of our work.///

Could it be that the public doesn't value our services because we sometimes don't place enough proper value on them ourselves?


///Yes, we need financial reform. I don't look to the government to do much about it, however. One can legislate endlessly.///

I also agree with you that we need financial reform and need it asap.

Donald Trump was interviewed by Greta van Susteran on Fox News a few nights ago.  He was concerned about how the U.S. has allowed a trade deficit with China to erode our economy.  He suggested a 25% tax on all imports coming from China into the U.S.  I think this is a brilliant idea.  As he added, this would help push companies to begin manufacturing those same items over here.  He was referring to the many building products that he purchases in bulk to construct his many projects.  He also mentioned how his friends who travel to China remarked how fantastic the architecture is over there- the brand new airports and public transportation systems compared to the rundown, aging LaGuardia airport and other infrastructure here in the U.S.  He said, "We're starting to look like a "Banana Republic" compared to them!"   Personally, I'm not excited about doing projects for China when our own country is in need of much renovation and rebuilding.  We need to stop and think about this: we are in debt to China up to our eyeballs, yet, we continue to buy most of our goods from China...how can we support this?  It is unsustainable.

///The real solutions to these problems lie within each one of us as individuals.///

I agree with you here; that is well said and so true.  For me personally, I think it is much easier to bounce back from tough times the younger we are; or maybe for moms like me, it's more difficult to juggle an intense job search and/or seek new clients while maintaining a balance between career and home/family. 

///Some pundit who's name escapes me once said "Don't confuse money with wealth". We have Ivy League graduates who haven't figured that out yet.///

So true.  I'm not sure what the point of this statement is, though, relative to this conversation... can you please expound? 

Thank you, again, for your comments Craig.  It is much appreciated.

Sincerely yours,

Tara

-------------------------------------------
Tara Imani AIA
Principal
Tara Imani Designs, LLC
Houston TX
-------------------------------------------

I don't believe the profession is approaching extinction, however, we seem to have been relegated to the periphery of the main stream ever since my first summer internship in 1987. Eric's sentiments ring true with me and my colleagues here in Buffalo, NY. New York State does require a stamp by an architect or engineer and it does provide a few more scraps for small firms but it doesn't change the reality that Eric describes. As a board member for the local chapter of the AIA and chairman of the residential committee, I have tried to keep residential architects in the public eye through articles in the home section of the paper, booths at the annual home show, and advertising in radio/magazines.

Eric's idea of getting through to the real estate agents has potential. Someone else mentioned the idea of the master builder. Locally, there are more and more talented architects working for developers. This trend has an up and down side. Large private developers seem to be using independent architects less and less for projects that independent architects used to handle from planning through construction phase, including churches and medical buildings. 

I take it Georgia does not require an architect or engineer's stamp for new homes and additions?
Anyone else care to offer whether their state requires the stamp?
-------------------------------------------
David Fleming AIA
Registered Architect
DRF Design
Buffalo NY
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 11-08-2010 08:19
From: Eric Rawlings
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

This most recent near extinction is nothing new for our profession. Most recently we saw a very similar occurrence in the early 90s. I remember job hunting right out of school and hearing the frustrated interviewers really looking for someone with 3-5 years of experience, but they didn't exist. There was a 3-5 year hiring freeze and all they had to pick from were very experienced Architects or greenies fresh out of school.

I'm going to hammer this home one more time. Residential, Residential, RESIDENTIAL! The main problem is that average people don't experience the design process of working with a professional Architect. Simply experiencing a wonderful public space isn't good enough! They don't understand the difference of the kind of ideas Architects can offer as opposed to the "easy to build" mentality of the builders who often portray themselves as the superior designers.

Your average person uses a contractor to design their home additions. They use lousy plan books to find new designs like it's a Pottery Barn catalogue. People want to purchase products, not ideas. The speculative house is so popular because it's new, it's finished, it's ready for YOU to move in now! Unfortunately, the builder typically chooses the design and this is the most common delivery method for homes to the public. People really think builders are the most important component to the success of a beautiful building. This is what the real estate agents make you think, as they are working for the spec builder, not the Architect. They are marketing the builder who sells the house and we seem as important as the dry wall sub. A good builder simply follows directions and doesn't try to "improve" the design in mid-construction, but this is what many builders think of as their strength and the reason Architects are obsolete. These are the guys who bring me out to the job site with a problem saying, "I built it JUST LIKE THE DRAWINGS."

The bank's appraisers recognize only the square footage and this is why the McMansion came to be. In order to make more money, the profit motive has been to build more building ONLY! The banks are beginning to recognize certified green buildings as being more valuable, but asking a banker to judge beauty is a frightening prospect. Some jurisdictions will allow house plans stamped by an Architect to bypass certain portions of review, speeding up the process. If requiring a stamp is too hard for this country, perhaps giving incentives would at least encourage some to do the right thing. 

I have said it before and I'll say it again, banks should give more value to a house designed by a local Architect than they do to a house coming from a catalogue of an unknown designer of unknown qualifications. The local Architect has been qualified by the State to practice the art of designing buildings. The local Architect may actually visit the job site, but where is the catalogue? The local Architect typically has a liability insurance policy, unlike the catalogue. The local Architect knows the local geography, weather, material availability, builder ability, snow loads, wind loads, etc. How does a catalogue know all of this? Most of all, how does the catalogue know what the houses next door look like? We've witnessed what happens when you give a builder this choice. It's as if they didn't pay attention to Sesame Street as children.

I think Architects who have established high values for the sales of their buildings should bring more value to a new project than someone who is not established. This motivates us to do a better job and design more "valuable" buildings and to begin establishing what "value" means. Why wouldn't someone want a Gucci House or a Vera Wang addition? Designers bring more value to all items in America, why not houses? There is a big difference between the amateur and the Architect, but the saddest thing is that I meet more resistance from other Architects on this idea than I do from builders. We have a very lousy perception of ourselves and our self defeatist mentality is holding us back more than "they" are.

-------------------------------------------
Eric Rawlings AIA
Owner
Rawlings Design, Inc.
Decatur GA
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-05-2010 02:14
From: Tara Imani
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

Hi Craig,

I appreciate your thoughtful response to my earlier post.  I agree with you, I too, see great works of architecture being carried out everyday, too. 

Setting aside the sensationalism of the thread title, I am concerned about the high rate of unemployment amongst licensed architects and the lack of new positions available for new graduates.  If we're not facing all-out extinction- which we obviously are not- what we are facing is both underemployment and under-utilization of architectural services, in my opinion.

You have said a few important things that I wanted to respond to:

///I agree with Mr. Rawlings that we need a greater presence in the residential sector. I don't like the idea of legislating such a presence, unless it is clearly part of government's mandate to protect the public's "health, safety, and welfare" (an expression that can be debated endlessly).///

I totally agree with you both that we need a greater presence in the residential sector.

I also like the idea that someone else had brought up on the blog- that is, "if it needs a permit, it needs an architect's stamp."  Why not?  Do we not need to hire an attorney if we want to file a legal action?  And do we not need a doctor's order or signature to obtain medical services or get a prescription filled?  Likewise, the public should need an architect to design and stamp drawings whenever they seek to build a shelter...no matter how small it is (as long as someone's going to be living in it; or storing items/substances/chemicals that require certain design parameters).  I think this is a reasonable, logical point.   Would you agree?
 
///I don't have any ideas on how to make our presence greater. After 40 years of practice, the problem seems to be the same: not enough of the public sees the value of our work.///

Could it be that the public doesn't value our services because we sometimes don't place enough proper value on them ourselves?


///Yes, we need financial reform. I don't look to the government to do much about it, however. One can legislate endlessly.///

I also agree with you that we need financial reform and need it asap.

Donald Trump was interviewed by Greta van Susteran on Fox News a few nights ago.  He was concerned about how the U.S. has allowed a trade deficit with China to erode our economy.  He suggested a 25% tax on all imports coming from China into the U.S.  I think this is a brilliant idea.  As he added, this would help push companies to begin manufacturing those same items over here.  He was referring to the many building products that he purchases in bulk to construct his many projects.  He also mentioned how his friends who travel to China remarked how fantastic the architecture is over there- the brand new airports and public transportation systems compared to the rundown, aging LaGuardia airport and other infrastructure here in the U.S.  He said, "We're starting to look like a "Banana Republic" compared to them!"   Personally, I'm not excited about doing projects for China when our own country is in need of much renovation and rebuilding.  We need to stop and think about this: we are in debt to China up to our eyeballs, yet, we continue to buy most of our goods from China...how can we support this?  It is unsustainable.

///The real solutions to these problems lie within each one of us as individuals.///

I agree with you here; that is well said and so true.  For me personally, I think it is much easier to bounce back from tough times the younger we are; or maybe for moms like me, it's more difficult to juggle an intense job search and/or seek new clients while maintaining a balance between career and home/family. 

///Some pundit who's name escapes me once said "Don't confuse money with wealth". We have Ivy League graduates who haven't figured that out yet.///

So true.  I'm not sure what the point of this statement is, though, relative to this conversation... can you please expound? 

Thank you, again, for your comments Craig.  It is much appreciated.

Sincerely yours,

Tara

-------------------------------------------
Tara Imani AIA
Principal
Tara Imani Designs, LLC
Houston TX
-------------------------------------------

Georgia has some strange rules.  Loosely described:
* architect's stamp not required if less than $150k construction cost (commercial) unless daycare or assembly occupancy.
* architect's stamp not required on single family residential or duplex (they might allow triplex, I don't remember) for new construction or addition/renovation.
* all projects submitted for permit must show technical competency and meet IBC with current georgia amendments.  With that said - building officials will 'allow' a property owner to draw and permit their own project, provided it meets the criteria; I've befriended a few jurisdictions and when they see a project they know the owner does not have the personal competency, they will suggest a professional (architect) is hired to prepare the permit drawings.

I'd like to suggest that the focus should really be on the notion of "PERMIT DRAWINGS" or the 'I need an architect to draw me some blueprints' is the problem here...Architects (can) provide so much more intrinsic value to a project beyond the instruments of service.  The notion of permit-only service is perceived as a necessary evil for a business owner or home owner to get to their end result; where I contend it's not about the permit obtained, it's about the intellectual power and decisions made during the process.

-------------------------------------------
Lisa Stacholy AIA
LKS Architects, Inc.
Dunwoody GA
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-10-2010 07:23
From: David Fleming
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

I don't believe the profession is approaching extinction, however, we seem to have been relegated to the periphery of the main stream ever since my first summer internship in 1987. Eric's sentiments ring true with me and my colleagues here in Buffalo, NY. New York State does require a stamp by an architect or engineer and it does provide a few more scraps for small firms but it doesn't change the reality that Eric describes. As a board member for the local chapter of the AIA and chairman of the residential committee, I have tried to keep residential architects in the public eye through articles in the home section of the paper, booths at the annual home show, and advertising in radio/magazines.

Eric's idea of getting through to the real estate agents has potential. Someone else mentioned the idea of the master builder. Locally, there are more and more talented architects working for developers. This trend has an up and down side. Large private developers seem to be using independent architects less and less for projects that independent architects used to handle from planning through construction phase, including churches and medical buildings. 

I take it Georgia does not require an architect or engineer's stamp for new homes and additions?
Anyone else care to offer whether their state requires the stamp?
-------------------------------------------
David Fleming AIA
Registered Architect
DRF Design
Buffalo NY
-------------------------------------------

Lisa is correct in here assessment. It's not about our ability to handle building codes and the likes of other technical matters. Anyone can do that with time and effort (even though I believe we do it best). Our value lies in the intangible abilities we have to design. We are to design buildings and spaces that make the lives of the everyday man or woman better. Yes all of the technical things allow us to realize the actual construction the way we envisioned it, but it's our talent for the three dimensional that sets us apart from the majority. They can't see what we see until its built, and then many still miss it.

People buy things of quality not merely for the pragmatic functional reasons. Why buy a BMW when a smaller, cheaper car still gets you there. Why pay more for a meal when you can get nutrition for less. And to break it down, we as architects are not always advocating for the more expensive, just the "better."

One way may be to promote more evidence based design solutions in a way the public will listen and understand. We can already demonstrate how design improves quality of life issues (healing, learning, productivity) at hospitals, schools, corporate offices and other institutions. How do we break that down to small offices, retail centers and most importantly houses.

That's what we can do that no one else can. That's our value.

-------------------------------------------
Lee Calisti AIA
Principal
lee CALISTI architecture+design
Greensburg PA
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 11-11-2010 08:27
From: Lisa Stacholy
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

Georgia has some strange rules.  Loosely described:
* architect's stamp not required if less than $150k construction cost (commercial) unless daycare or assembly occupancy.
* architect's stamp not required on single family residential or duplex (they might allow triplex, I don't remember) for new construction or addition/renovation.
* all projects submitted for permit must show technical competency and meet IBC with current georgia amendments.  With that said - building officials will 'allow' a property owner to draw and permit their own project, provided it meets the criteria; I've befriended a few jurisdictions and when they see a project they know the owner does not have the personal competency, they will suggest a professional (architect) is hired to prepare the permit drawings.

I'd like to suggest that the focus should really be on the notion of "PERMIT DRAWINGS" or the 'I need an architect to draw me some blueprints' is the problem here...Architects (can) provide so much more intrinsic value to a project beyond the instruments of service.  The notion of permit-only service is perceived as a necessary evil for a business owner or home owner to get to their end result; where I contend it's not about the permit obtained, it's about the intellectual power and decisions made during the process.

-------------------------------------------
Lisa Stacholy AIA
LKS Architects, Inc.
Dunwoody GA
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-10-2010 07:23
From: David Fleming
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

I don't believe the profession is approaching extinction, however, we seem to have been relegated to the periphery of the main stream ever since my first summer internship in 1987. Eric's sentiments ring true with me and my colleagues here in Buffalo, NY. New York State does require a stamp by an architect or engineer and it does provide a few more scraps for small firms but it doesn't change the reality that Eric describes. As a board member for the local chapter of the AIA and chairman of the residential committee, I have tried to keep residential architects in the public eye through articles in the home section of the paper, booths at the annual home show, and advertising in radio/magazines.

Eric's idea of getting through to the real estate agents has potential. Someone else mentioned the idea of the master builder. Locally, there are more and more talented architects working for developers. This trend has an up and down side. Large private developers seem to be using independent architects less and less for projects that independent architects used to handle from planning through construction phase, including churches and medical buildings. 

I take it Georgia does not require an architect or engineer's stamp for new homes and additions?
Anyone else care to offer whether their state requires the stamp?
-------------------------------------------
David Fleming AIA
Registered Architect
DRF Design
Buffalo NY
-------------------------------------------

Interior Designers in GA may do non-structural commercial work for Office use without an Architect's stamp as well. There is a strange rule about Retail buildings that are single story and less than 50ft deep (I think) that is geared toward rural areas where Architects are scarce. 

I have "listened" from a distance by reading the recent postings. The most insightful comments have come from Mr. Rawlings. Yes we can get the government to "mandate" that we have our seal on any building including houses. Who cares? Because that does not elevate the public's awareness of what we do nor does it cause them to value our contributions. It simply frustrates them to another required step that costs them more money before they can move into their big ugly house.

Not to pick at a scab, but too bad, here goes. Everyone pays the real estate agent with no question. We pay the contractor their hidden fee. We pay the auto technician their fee. We even pay the notary public (which is what some in my experience have likened our seal on drawings to incorrectly). On and on it goes for everything in our lives...except for the buildings that we live, work and play in everyday.

Good comment Eric about "designer ____." We all pay "more" when there is a designer label on it from clothes, shoes, cars, furniture or even food. Why not architecture? Why not our houses?

It comes down to value and we are all convinced. Why aren't they?

-------------------------------------------
Lee Calisti AIA
Principal
lee CALISTI architecture+design
Greensburg PA
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 11-10-2010 07:23
From: David Fleming
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

I don't believe the profession is approaching extinction, however, we seem to have been relegated to the periphery of the main stream ever since my first summer internship in 1987. Eric's sentiments ring true with me and my colleagues here in Buffalo, NY. New York State does require a stamp by an architect or engineer and it does provide a few more scraps for small firms but it doesn't change the reality that Eric describes. As a board member for the local chapter of the AIA and chairman of the residential committee, I have tried to keep residential architects in the public eye through articles in the home section of the paper, booths at the annual home show, and advertising in radio/magazines.

Eric's idea of getting through to the real estate agents has potential. Someone else mentioned the idea of the master builder. Locally, there are more and more talented architects working for developers. This trend has an up and down side. Large private developers seem to be using independent architects less and less for projects that independent architects used to handle from planning through construction phase, including churches and medical buildings. 

I take it Georgia does not require an architect or engineer's stamp for new homes and additions?
Anyone else care to offer whether their state requires the stamp?
-------------------------------------------
David Fleming AIA
Registered Architect
DRF Design
Buffalo NY
-------------------------------------------

Interesting to see this subject in the forum as my business partner and I have been discussing the state of the profession and somewhat on this topic.

There are many superb responses here.  I feel the need to gather them together, distill the main points, and write a final paper.  For now, though, here is a brief synopsis (by no means all-encompassing) of what I think has been the high points brought up most often...

Before I do that, however, I want to post a portion of one of Eric Rawling's prior posts.  He said:

///I think Architects who have established high values for the sales of their buildings should bring more value to a new project than someone who is not established. This motivates us to do a better job and design more "valuable" buildings and to begin establishing what "value" means. Why wouldn't someone want a Gucci House or a Vera Wang addition? Designers bring more value to all items in America, why not houses? There is a big difference between the amateur and the Architect, but the saddest thing is that I meet more resistance from other Architects on this idea than I do from builders. We have a very lousy perception of ourselves and our self defeatist mentality is holding us back more than "they" are.///

I think this is one of the most important points Eric made.  I think it's valid to compare fashion designers to building designers.  So, it got me thinking: who is the Vera Wang or Gucci of architectural design?  Most likely, it's Zaha Hadid, Frank O. Gehry, Calatravi, I.M. Pei; and, from years gone by, there is Frank Lloyd Wright, Meis van der Rohe, Alvar Aalto, HH Richardson, Louis Sullivan, and Louis Kahn, etc. to name a few and in no particular order.  And let's not forget Julia Morgan, AIA.   What?  You've not heard of her?  Or perhaps you have but most likely not while you were in architecture school. 

Anyways, the likelihood of someone famous in architecture adding their point of view to this discussion is slim to none.  Why?  Because they're too busy doing what we wish we were all doing: creating DESIGNS that people crave.  I guess we can't all reach the heights of a Gucci status brand, but we can try.  Somebody has to make the pants that sell at Walmart.  Not everyone can afford to buy only Guess jeans or Vera Wang gowns.  Putting a Gucci bag with an outfit purchased at Macy's is okay; adding a Michael Grave's addition to a spec home is ridiculous.  But we can try to do it...  Sometimes it's hard to accept that we are bound by certain economies of scale.  Yet, the over-arching point is: as architects, we are equipped- and required/expected- to provide good quality design at any price point.

Back to the idea of prioritizing the main ideas that have surfaced so far...

As I first stated above, I am trying to wrap my mind around all the points that everyone has been making and plan to write them in a coherent manner to share them at a later time.

For now, here is a quick, rough-draft overview:

1. We need to define who we are as architects and what are the core general services we provide. This needs to be separated into two distinct categories: residential and commercial.

2. We need to recapture the training and mindset of the "Master Builder" (i.e. Imhotep; or the architect(s) of the Parthenon, for ex.- how they took care in overseeing the carving of each stone...)

3. We need to revisit our notion of what defines "good design"- aesthetically, functionally, cost-efficiency-wise, environmentally, etc.

4. We need to develop better self-images and we need to really strive to improve our camaraderie and mutual respect between one another, as fellow AIA members, and within the greater architectural community and allied professions.

5. We need to explore more meaningful ways to connect with the public and increase our leadership roles in every facet of society

6. We need to collectively resolve to take back the residential industry/market by storm and work together to create and implement a cohesive, workable strategy to do so.

7.  We need to create a marketing campaign on TV, the internet, social media of all types that will influence how the public perceives architects and their value to society's health, safety, welfare, and aesthetics

8.  We need to get adequately paid for the services we render.  This means, as a pledge to your fellow colleaugues, you will not agree to work for less than an appropriate professional rate for any given architectural service rendered.

Again, this is just a rough draft.

Thanks, again, to everyone who has read and/or posted your thoughts on this topic.  I think everyone's opinion on this forum is valid and has a right to be heard, especially those of you who are fortunate enough to be working and are in the trenches providing architectural services at this time.

Maybe this topic is nearing an end.  Still yet, I always look forward to receiving further input.

Sincerely yours,
Tara

P.S.  I posted this a moment ago, by mistake, as a post rather than a reply to this discussion forum.  I apologize for the error and the resultant inconvenience of it being posted twice in the SPP knowledge community.

-------------------------------------------
Tara Imani AIA
Architect/Owner
Tara Imani Designs, LLC
Houston TX
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 11-11-2010 12:22
From: Robert Gualtieri
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

Interesting to see this subject in the forum as my business partner and I have been discussing the state of the profession and somewhat on this topic.

It seems to me that historically our profession and the advocates for our profession have not done as good a job in promoting the profession of Architecture as well as other professions. Nor have we been a unified profession. Real estate professionals; Contractors; Attorneys, etc have done a much better job of getting the word out about the services they offer and the value in the service they offer. When was the last time you saw a commercial about our profession or heard an advertisement on the radio? How much press has there been about the state of our profession since the downturn in the economy?

I don't believe the profession is on the verge of extinction. We provide a necessary and valuable service to the community at large. However I do believe now is a great time to unify and re-emphasize and re-establish who we are to the community. I've found myself many times recently looking at all the buildings/structures around me on my drive to my office...and I think..."Architects play a role in providing shelter for all walks of life; all forms of business. We provide an extremely valuable service." I don't say that with a "big head" from an ego perspective. I say it because its true and also out of frustration that our profession is not recognized enough for what we do and what we can offer. Nor are we compensated well for our services. I've been in this profession for 30 years and it amazes me that the profession has not significantly progressed in these areas.

Now in this economy we are pressured more and more to provide the same (if not additional) services for the same fee and even for less fee to try and keep the doors open. Clients are dictating fees. Our profession is not. I'm speaking more to the private sector; but there are a lot of us out there doing private sector work. I've seen firms in the Central Florida area drop from 80-150 persons to 5-10; back to only the ownership. It's an extremely difficulty business environment for all of us.

I'll get off my soap box now :-) before I get too carried away and make this too lengthy. I am passionate about this subject and I truly believe now is the time to start taking a critical look at our profession and look at what we need to and can do to improve going forward.

-------------------------------------------
Robert Gualtieri
Partner
OB + Architecture, Inc.
Orlando FL
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-10-2010 07:23
From: David Fleming
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

I don't believe the profession is approaching extinction, however, we seem to have been relegated to the periphery of the main stream ever since my first summer internship in 1987. Eric's sentiments ring true with me and my colleagues here in Buffalo, NY. New York State does require a stamp by an architect or engineer and it does provide a few more scraps for small firms but it doesn't change the reality that Eric describes. As a board member for the local chapter of the AIA and chairman of the residential committee, I have tried to keep residential architects in the public eye through articles in the home section of the paper, booths at the annual home show, and advertising in radio/magazines.

Eric's idea of getting through to the real estate agents has potential. Someone else mentioned the idea of the master builder. Locally, there are more and more talented architects working for developers. This trend has an up and down side. Large private developers seem to be using independent architects less and less for projects that independent architects used to handle from planning through construction phase, including churches and medical buildings. 

I take it Georgia does not require an architect or engineer's stamp for new homes and additions?
Anyone else care to offer whether their state requires the stamp?
-------------------------------------------
David Fleming AIA
Registered Architect
DRF Design
Buffalo NY
-------------------------------------------

I totally agree with "It seems to me that historically our profession and the advocates for our profession have not done as good a job in promoting the profession of Architecture as well as other professions."

Abysmal is a better word.  I have left the AIA for this reason.  In my opinion, all the AIA is doing for the profession is charging architects to put "AIA" after their name.  They have done a great job making the public think that AIA means architect. That's about the only topic on which I see the AIA educating the public, because it behooves them. Now they even allow "Associate AIA"!  Think people realize that they're not architects?  

I see advertisement for corn, medicines, energy and almost every product or service out there.  I've never seen one advertisement from the AIA or anyone educating the public about architecture.  Just what does the AIA do with the dues and other fees.

The public is so unaware of what architects actually do that our services are undervalued.  I had one person call me and ask me, "Do you have any garage plans with a mother-in-law suite lying around?"

Some of it is architects fault.  We put up with things no other trained professionals would dream of.  In North Carolina, an engineer can basically provide any architectural service as long as they don't label the sheets with an "A".  I know engineers that do entire buildings and just label the sheets as E1.0 Engineering floor plan.  E2.0 Engineering elevation etc.  Just what is an "Engineering Elevation?"  As architects in North Carolina, we are allowed to do "incidental engineering" which is not legally defined. 

Oklahoma is doing the best that I've seen to protect the profession.  Oklahoma states that only an architect can provide, renderings, elevations, floorplans and other design items.  Engineering is limited to true engineering; sizing beams, columns, electrical, plulmbing , mechanical etc.  One thing we can do is to work to get other states to look at and emulate Oklahoma's statutes.  I believe Texas may follow suit.

NCARB is another peeve of mine; ridiculous fees to maintain and transmit records.  How much does it cost to not lose a few pieces of paper and fax them out every now and then?

My father was a doctor.  His AMA and other dues were less than ours and the services provided by the organizations was much greater.

I will rejoin the AIA if they step up and become the advocates for the profession that they are paid to be.  Unfortunately, the only thing that seems to interest them is adding bureaucracy to architects, continuing education, making infitesimal changes to AIA standard documents and having architects chat amongst themselves.  Here we all are talking about the topic but it does no good.  We're all architects.  The AIA needs to step up.

-------------------------------------------
Stephen Schles
President
Asheville Area Architecture, Inc.
Leicester NC
-------------------------------------------

Stephen,

I really do wish you would join AIA again, if not for anything other than helping to pay for this forum. It's one thing to criticize, it's another to do nothing to try to improve your own profession through the only credible collective voice we share. The more involved you become, the more you will understand exactly what AIA has done, is doing, and is planning to do in the future.

As to some of the facts you quoted, I believe you are misinformed about OK's regulations. There seem to be more exemptions than building types / use groups that require an architect. (See below for an excerpt.) It seems that the only Use Groups that require an architect for projects of any size are I, R-2, A-1, A-4 and A-5. And there are plenty of exemptions based on size of project. I'd bet that the exemptions cover the majority of building projects in the State.

If you want to emulate any State's regulations, it ought to be New Jersey's, where every building whose primary purpose is human habitation must be designed by an architect, with one exception, and this is for owner occupied, single family dwellings where the owner not only prepares the plans but constructs it themselves. I think we are the only State that at least recognizes that we all (citizen tax payers, that is) spend some amount of time in our residences and deserve to be protected from the incompetent or illegal practice of architecture in our own homes, which is often the single largest investment most people make.

(Yes, there is an exemption in NJ for owner occupied, single family dwellings, where the owner signs an affidavit stating that they produced the drawings themselves AND will act as the general contractor, eschewing Consumer Fraud Protection afforded those who hire a separate GC.)

The division between architectural practice and enginering practice in NJ is by Use Group, defined in the Building Design Service Act, which essentially follows the "for human habitation" rule I mentioned above. There are some use groups that allow both architects and engineers to deign, and instances where incidental architectural uses in an engineering project can be done by an engineer and vice versa. I've attached Bulletin 96-2 which describes this division of responsibility.

From the OK website (http://www.ok.gov/Architects/Act_&_Rules/index.html) :

Section 46.21b

A.  An architect shall be required to plan, design and prepare plans and specifications for the following building types except where specifically exempt from the provisions of the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act.  All use groups in this section are defined by the 2003 International Building Code.

 B.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building of any size or occupancy in the following Code Use Groups shall be subject to the provisions of the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act:

1.  Code Use Group I - Institutional;

 2.  Code Use Group R-2 - Residential, limited to dormitories, fraternities and sororities, and monasteries and convents;

 3.  Code Use Group A-1 - Assembly and theaters;

 4.  Code Use Group A-4 - Assembly, arenas and courts;

 5.  Code Use Group A-5 - Assembly, bleachers and grandstands; and

6.  Buildings for which the designated Code Use Group changes are not exempt from the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act

 

C.  The following shall be exempt from the provisions of the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act, provided that, for the purposes of this subsection, a basement is not to be counted as a story for the purpose of counting stories of a building for height regulations:

 

1.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building no more than two (2) stories in height and with a code - defined occupancy of no more than fifty (50) persons  for the Code Use Groups A-2 and A-3 - Assembly and Code Use Group E - Education;

 

2.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building no more than two (2) stories in height and no more than sixty-four (64) transient lodging units per building for the Code Use Group R1 - Residential, including, but not limited to, hotels and motels;

 

3.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building no more than two (2) stories in height and with a gross square footage not exceeding one hundred thousand (100,000) in the Code Use Group B - Business;

 

4.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building no more than two (2) stories in height and with a gross square footage not exceeding two hundred thousand (200,000) in the Code Use Group M - Mercantile; and

 

5.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building no more than two (2) stories in height in the following Code Use Groups or buildings:

 

 

a.         Code Use Group U - Utility,

 

b.         Code Use Group F - Factory and Industrial,

 

c.         Code Use Group H - High hazard,

 

d.         Code Use Group S - Storage,

 

e.         Code Use Group R2 - Residential, including apartments containing no more than thirty-two (32) dwelling units or thirty-two (32) guest units per building,

 

f.          Code Use Groups R3 and R4 - Residential,

 

g.         all buildings used by a municipality, county, state, public trust, public agency or the federal government with a construction value under One Hundred Fifty-eight Thousand Dollars ($158,000.00),

 

h.         incidental buildings or appurtenances associated with paragraphs 1 through 5 of this subsection, and

 

i.          all uninhabitable, privately owned agricultural buildings.

 

D.  The renovation or alteration of a building where the intended use is exempt as new construction shall be exempt from the provisions of the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act.

 

E.  Addition, renovation or alteration of buildings where the intended use is not exempt from the provisions of this act, but where the planned addition or alteration, as determined by the applicable building official, does not affect the primary structural, mechanical, or electrical systems, life-safety systems or exit passageways shall be exempt from the provisions of the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act.

-------------------------------------------
David Del Vecchio AIA
Architect
David Del Vecchio, Architect, LLC
Cranford NJ
-------------------------------------------

I noticed that a few other similar discussion threads have been created and, in reading this particular post from Christopher Carley, AIA, I felt it was important to inlcude what he said here on the original discussion thread:

/////////////Christopher Carley AIA, LEED AP wrote the following post on another discussion thread titled Architects' Extinction:

///I have been following this thread with interest and would like to throw in a couple of cents.

Every project, even the arrangement of the furniture in a room, has an architect.  What varies is the level of attention, skill and experience that the architect brings to the task.  At some point on the scale from flower arrangement to master plan, those in charge of the money decide to get professional design help.  In some cases the law says they have to, although they can evade that by hiring an engineer, some of whom seem to be willing to stamp anything on their desk for a modest fee.  The profession of architecture, the exercise of specialized skill obtained through education and practice, will be extinct when no more projects rise to the level of needing a pro.  Because we are in the bust phase of a construction boom, many fewer architects are in demand than were, but the demand is not zero and likely never will be.

The small projects that most of us do tend toward the no-architect end of the scale, where buyers perceive less value added by professional help.  That means that they will tend to call on us infrequently and demand low fees when they do seek us out.  Barriers to entry for new firms are comparatively low and architects as a type are notoriously independent minded.  This leads to a perpetual over supply serving a chronically soft demand.  While not strong, that demand is not likely to ever be zero, so even the small office practice probably does not face extinction.

What could the AIA do to make the demand curve intersect the supply a little closer to the small end and make life more fun (and better paid) for those of us who work there?

Some ideas:

1. Forget about trying to limit competition or increase demand through the licensing laws.  This kind of rent seeking should be beneath us and, anyway, it is unlikely to succeed.  The more you try to use the law to force people to do something that costs them more than they think it's worth, the cleverer they will be about evading the you.

2.  Concentrate on ways to make potential clients believe that the value added by professional design help is worth the cost.  This can be done in two ways-- change perception through marketing and publicity and, much more promising, actually improve the value added.  This the AIA could do by spending more time and resources on directly helping the proletariat of our profession to be better at what we do.  We could use more and better technical information about design, codes, law, business, marketing, etc.  We need some unvarnished information on how people who don't hire us (but might) see us.  One idea is our own version of Wikipedia for architects and designers where we could share experiences with materials, techniques, business problems, etc in a systematic rather than random conversational way.  Another possibility is a version of Consumer Reports for building technologies and materials.  Perhaps a little more of our dues money going to direct involvement in strengthening our skills and knowledge and a little less to happy talk about sustainability on Capitol Hill would be in helpful.

-------------------------------------------
Christopher Carley AIA, LEED AP
C. N. Carley Associates///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////


*Please note: the above post was copied and posted to this discussion thread from another thread titled "Architects' Extinction."

I think Mr. Carley's second point is extremely important and well made.  I fully endorse his ideas as shared here.


Thank you,
Tara

-------------------------------------------
Tara Imani AIA
Architect/Owner
Tara Imani Designs, LLC
Houston TX
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 11-12-2010 15:28
From: David Del Vecchio
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?


Stephen,

I really do wish you would join AIA again, if not for anything other than helping to pay for this forum. It's one thing to criticize, it's another to do nothing to try to improve your own profession through the only credible collective voice we share. The more involved you become, the more you will understand exactly what AIA has done, is doing, and is planning to do in the future.

As to some of the facts you quoted, I believe you are misinformed about OK's regulations. There seem to be more exemptions than building types / use groups that require an architect. (See below for an excerpt.) It seems that the only Use Groups that require an architect for projects of any size are I, R-2, A-1, A-4 and A-5. And there are plenty of exemptions based on size of project. I'd bet that the exemptions cover the majority of building projects in the State.

If you want to emulate any State's regulations, it ought to be New Jersey's, where every building whose primary purpose is human habitation must be designed by an architect, with one exception, and this is for owner occupied, single family dwellings where the owner not only prepares the plans but constructs it themselves. I think we are the only State that at least recognizes that we all (citizen tax payers, that is) spend some amount of time in our residences and deserve to be protected from the incompetent or illegal practice of architecture in our own homes, which is often the single largest investment most people make.

(Yes, there is an exemption in NJ for owner occupied, single family dwellings, where the owner signs an affidavit stating that they produced the drawings themselves AND will act as the general contractor, eschewing Consumer Fraud Protection afforded those who hire a separate GC.)

The division between architectural practice and enginering practice in NJ is by Use Group, defined in the Building Design Service Act, which essentially follows the "for human habitation" rule I mentioned above. There are some use groups that allow both architects and engineers to design, and instances where incidental architectural uses in an engineering project can be done by an engineer and vice versa. I've attached Bulletin 96-2 which describes this division of responsibility.

From the OK website (http://www.ok.gov/Architects/Act_&_Rules/index.html) :

Section 46.21b

A.  An architect shall be required to plan, design and prepare plans and specifications for the following building types except where specifically exempt from the provisions of the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act.  All use groups in this section are defined by the 2003 International Building Code.

 B.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building of any size or occupancy in the following Code Use Groups shall be subject to the provisions of the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act:

1.  Code Use Group I - Institutional;

 2.  Code Use Group R-2 - Residential, limited to dormitories, fraternities and sororities, and monasteries and convents;

 3.  Code Use Group A-1 - Assembly and theaters;

 4.  Code Use Group A-4 - Assembly, arenas and courts;

 5.  Code Use Group A-5 - Assembly, bleachers and grandstands; and

6.  Buildings for which the designated Code Use Group changes are not exempt from the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act

 

C.  The following shall be exempt from the provisions of the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act, provided that, for the purposes of this subsection, a basement is not to be counted as a story for the purpose of counting stories of a building for height regulations:

 

1.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building no more than two (2) stories in height and with a code - defined occupancy of no more than fifty (50) persons  for the Code Use Groups A-2 and A-3 - Assembly and Code Use Group E - Education;

 

2.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building no more than two (2) stories in height and no more than sixty-four (64) transient lodging units per building for the Code Use Group R1 - Residential, including, but not limited to, hotels and motels;

 

3.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building no more than two (2) stories in height and with a gross square footage not exceeding one hundred thousand (100,000) in the Code Use Group B - Business;

 

4.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building no more than two (2) stories in height and with a gross square footage not exceeding two hundred thousand (200,000) in the Code Use Group M - Mercantile; and

 

5.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building no more than two (2) stories in height in the following Code Use Groups or buildings:

 

 

a.         Code Use Group U - Utility,

 

b.         Code Use Group F - Factory and Industrial,

 

c.         Code Use Group H - High hazard,

 

d.         Code Use Group S - Storage,

 

e.         Code Use Group R2 - Residential, including apartments containing no more than thirty-two (32) dwelling units or thirty-two (32) guest units per building,

 

f.          Code Use Groups R3 and R4 - Residential,

 

g.         all buildings used by a municipality, county, state, public trust, public agency or the federal government with a construction value under One Hundred Fifty-eight Thousand Dollars ($158,000.00),

 

h.         incidental buildings or appurtenances associated with paragraphs 1 through 5 of this subsection, and

 

i.          all uninhabitable, privately owned agricultural buildings.

 

D.  The renovation or alteration of a building where the intended use is exempt as new construction shall be exempt from the provisions of the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act.

 

E.  Addition, renovation or alteration of buildings where the intended use is not exempt from the provisions of this act, but where the planned addition or alteration, as determined by the applicable building official, does not affect the primary structural, mechanical, or electrical systems, life-safety systems or exit passageways shall be exempt from the provisions of the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act.

-------------------------------------------
David Del Vecchio AIA
Architect
David Del Vecchio, Architect, LLC
Cranford NJ
-------------------------------------------

I think you missed my point entirely.  And of course you are going to stump for the AIA as candidate for secretary of the american institute of architects.

First of all, you say you want me back as a member yet, you say that I don't understand.  You catch more flies with honey than vinegar.  You are trying to sell me a product, it would be better to explain the value of the product than to insult the potential customer.  To say I don't understand is insultingly patronizing.  Plus, you did not state one thing that addressed my concerns. 

I criticized the AIA when I was a member too and nothing ever came of it.  I've only received defensive answers similar to yours, actually more often no response at all.  At least you responded to my concerns, if nothing more than to reprimand me like a recalcitrant child.  It is interesting that you did not mention one thing that the AIA has, is or will be doing to improve the profession, just that I need to be educated.  Since I am so woefully uninformed, here is your chance to enlighten me on the value of the AIA.

You say the AIA is doing stuff.  This is your chance to convince me and others.  Just what exactly is the AIA doing to promote and protect the profession?  This forum is certainly not enough for me to pay your dues.  This enlightens the public and protects the profession zero.  I started talking in here because I wanted to see how others feel and to let it be known why I left the AIA.  I'm by no means the only architect that I know that is underwhelmed with the AIA. 

If you want to keep, maintain and attract members, you need to first, not insult them.  Second, have value.  Third, be able to explain that value.  To me, I would value the AIA if what you do increases my profit more than the cost of my dues.  From my experience, it does not.  I see no economic benefit to the AIA.     

You say I'm not doing anything to improve the profession.  That is false.  I am trying to jar the AIA awake.  You talk about the credible voice we share but the problem is from what I've seen, it is only shared amongst ourselves.  Why do I never see AIA TV commercials educating the public?  I only see the profession's role getting smaller and smaller.

As far as your comments about me being uninformed on Oklahoma.  First, you really like to call me uninformed.  It's amazing that you would want someone as uninformed as me as a member.  Next, all states have stipulations on what type of buildings must have an architect.   What I was talking about was the fact that many states such as North Carolina basically allow engineers to perform architecture, not what type of building requires an architect.  NC has regulations that say for example an architect is needed on a new commercial office building.  Yet, engineers are regularly performing both the architecture and engineering on these buildings simply by labeling the architecture as "E" sheets.  I do agree that what type and size of building requires an architect is just as important and although OK has done a good job differentiating the difference between engineer and architect, it seems to have done a poor job delineating what buildings require an architect.  

However, you are actually making my point for me.  How, why and when did the AIA drop the ball letting the profession of architecture be usurped by other professions in the various states?  How did it come to be that so many building types do not require an architect?  Why didn't the AIA do a better job lobbying to protect the profession and public by ensuring a licensed architect is involved in almost every building project.

Perhaps a fusion of NJ, OK and other laws is the best.   What we need is architecture by architects and not engineers, interior designers, contractors and others.  We need the laws to require and architect to be involved in most every building type and size and to not allow engineers, interior designers and others to perform architecture. And it seems that the AIA did nothing to make sure that this is the case.

So, what has the AIA done to make sure the profession is protected in all states?   What has the AIA done to ensure that only architects can perform architecture?  What has the AIA done to make sure that all building types require an architect?  What has the AIA done to educate the public on the value of architects?  What success have you had?  Success is required for value.  The AIA has been around for a long time but the profession has only become weaker over the years.  The profession has sold off all the engineering, interior design, landscape architecture, urban planning, facilities management, various building types and sizes and other aspects that used to be part of the profession.  If the AIA is our "only credible voice"  why hasn't it spoken?  Or has it spoken but it is impotent?



-------------------------------------------
Stephen Schles
Principal-A3 Asheville Area Architecture, Inc.
Stephen Schles, AIA
Leicester NC
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 11-12-2010 15:28
From: David Del Vecchio
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?


Stephen,

I really do wish you would join AIA again, if not for anything other than helping to pay for this forum. It's one thing to criticize, it's another to do nothing to try to improve your own profession through the only credible collective voice we share. The more involved you become, the more you will understand exactly what AIA has done, is doing, and is planning to do in the future.

As to some of the facts you quoted, I believe you are misinformed about OK's regulations. There seem to be more exemptions than building types / use groups that require an architect. (See below for an excerpt.) It seems that the only Use Groups that require an architect for projects of any size are I, R-2, A-1, A-4 and A-5. And there are plenty of exemptions based on size of project. I'd bet that the exemptions cover the majority of building projects in the State.

If you want to emulate any State's regulations, it ought to be New Jersey's, where every building whose primary purpose is human habitation must be designed by an architect, with one exception, and this is for owner occupied, single family dwellings where the owner not only prepares the plans but constructs it themselves. I think we are the only State that at least recognizes that we all (citizen tax payers, that is) spend some amount of time in our residences and deserve to be protected from the incompetent or illegal practice of architecture in our own homes, which is often the single largest investment most people make.

(Yes, there is an exemption in NJ for owner occupied, single family dwellings, where the owner signs an affidavit stating that they produced the drawings themselves AND will act as the general contractor, eschewing Consumer Fraud Protection afforded those who hire a separate GC.)

The division between architectural practice and enginering practice in NJ is by Use Group, defined in the Building Design Service Act, which essentially follows the "for human habitation" rule I mentioned above. There are some use groups that allow both architects and engineers to deign, and instances where incidental architectural uses in an engineering project can be done by an engineer and vice versa. I've attached Bulletin 96-2 which describes this division of responsibility.

From the OK website (http://www.ok.gov/Architects/Act_&_Rules/index.html) :

Section 46.21b

A.  An architect shall be required to plan, design and prepare plans and specifications for the following building types except where specifically exempt from the provisions of the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act.  All use groups in this section are defined by the 2003 International Building Code.

 B.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building of any size or occupancy in the following Code Use Groups shall be subject to the provisions of the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act:

1.  Code Use Group I - Institutional;

 2.  Code Use Group R-2 - Residential, limited to dormitories, fraternities and sororities, and monasteries and convents;

 3.  Code Use Group A-1 - Assembly and theaters;

 4.  Code Use Group A-4 - Assembly, arenas and courts;

 5.  Code Use Group A-5 - Assembly, bleachers and grandstands; and

6.  Buildings for which the designated Code Use Group changes are not exempt from the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act

 

C.  The following shall be exempt from the provisions of the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act, provided that, for the purposes of this subsection, a basement is not to be counted as a story for the purpose of counting stories of a building for height regulations:

 

1.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building no more than two (2) stories in height and with a code - defined occupancy of no more than fifty (50) persons  for the Code Use Groups A-2 and A-3 - Assembly and Code Use Group E - Education;

 

2.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building no more than two (2) stories in height and no more than sixty-four (64) transient lodging units per building for the Code Use Group R1 - Residential, including, but not limited to, hotels and motels;

 

3.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building no more than two (2) stories in height and with a gross square footage not exceeding one hundred thousand (100,000) in the Code Use Group B - Business;

 

4.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building no more than two (2) stories in height and with a gross square footage not exceeding two hundred thousand (200,000) in the Code Use Group M - Mercantile; and

 

5.  The construction, addition or alteration of a building no more than two (2) stories in height in the following Code Use Groups or buildings:

 

 

a.         Code Use Group U - Utility,

 

b.         Code Use Group F - Factory and Industrial,

 

c.         Code Use Group H - High hazard,

 

d.         Code Use Group S - Storage,

 

e.         Code Use Group R2 - Residential, including apartments containing no more than thirty-two (32) dwelling units or thirty-two (32) guest units per building,

 

f.          Code Use Groups R3 and R4 - Residential,

 

g.         all buildings used by a municipality, county, state, public trust, public agency or the federal government with a construction value under One Hundred Fifty-eight Thousand Dollars ($158,000.00),

 

h.         incidental buildings or appurtenances associated with paragraphs 1 through 5 of this subsection, and

 

i.          all uninhabitable, privately owned agricultural buildings.

 

D.  The renovation or alteration of a building where the intended use is exempt as new construction shall be exempt from the provisions of the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act.

 

E.  Addition, renovation or alteration of buildings where the intended use is not exempt from the provisions of this act, but where the planned addition or alteration, as determined by the applicable building official, does not affect the primary structural, mechanical, or electrical systems, life-safety systems or exit passageways shall be exempt from the provisions of the State Architectural and Registered Interior Designers Act.

-------------------------------------------
David Del Vecchio AIA
Architect
David Del Vecchio, Architect, LLC
Cranford NJ
-------------------------------------------

Ann and Christian, you were on target regarding we all must realize this is a national problem and it is about time National get involved.

Stephen

I totally agree with you but dropping out is not the answer you must rejoin and fight for what you believe in. There are many of us that feel the way you do but when you drop out you are in effect abandoning those of us who agree and thereby decrease our ability to get the changes done. For some strange reason I feel that I am wrong when I go to meetings and fight for what is right but get no support other than one or two people who come to me after meetings and thank me for saying what they are afraid to say.

If you think NC has problems come to NYC where you will really get an education, and possibly want to drop out of the profession.

In NYC you have Engineers who do Architectural work, expediters that take on Architectural work and get some greedy Architect or Engineer who has a comfortable job and stamps drawings for pocket change.
 
Now if you are in a small practice (4 persons) you are really in a bad place. NYC has a new code for new building and three old codes for existing buildings ( which have many deletions refering you to their new code). Not to mention the new Energy Code, Housing Maintenance Code and Multiple Dwelling Code. in addition to that there are about 100 pages of text issued monthly to clarify or amend codes and regulations and constant form changes. But we should not forget our Zoning Manual and Regulations which have become so complex ( you could have as many as 4 different zones on a block) and It is very confusing creating a good chance of making mistakes is great. In some zones height and envelope restrictions make a one family house look like the Jolly Green Giant sat on them.

Years ago the NYC Architects Council was formed to represent all the Architectural organization with a unified  voice. It was composed of 4 of the 5 AIA chapters in NYC, SARA and the NY society of Architects. For years they tried to enlist the NY Chapter to join. eventually they joined but it only lasted a few years when they realized they could not control the group. When the Council wanted to join in a lawsuit against NYC they dropped out. This was over an issue where the mayor had the requirenments changed to allow a building commissioner who is not a Licensed Professional. 

We now have an unlicensed Buildings Comissioner. The Commissioner has been handed the right to prosecute a professional,  convict him and prevent him/her from practicing in NYC. All without the need of getting the State Education  Department involved. They have some great tools, actually three words, FALSIFCATION OF DOCUMENT and not following code requirements. Now you can simply make an honest mistake and forget to check off a box on one of the many forms and its all over. Falsification of documents is a serious offense and the penalty is worse than selling drugs. To them Architects and Engineers are criminals, they do not make mistakes, they are being held to a higher standard of care than any other professional anywhere on the planet. If they forget to check off a box they are deliberately doing it.  The NYC Buildings Department now is top heavy with lawyers to watch over us waiting to nail  the coffin shut. They even monitor the internet to see if someone says bad things about them. They can't be wrong either, since they are the accuser, investigator, prosecutor, judge and jury. But just in case they also have an additional tool just in case a judge doesn't agree with them. The Building Commissioner has a right to overule the judges decision and convict a professional. I thought there was something written somewhere about judgement by your peers. Their conviction rate is close to 100%. Democracy has hit an all time low. But you should expect this NYC is governed by a mayor who gets what he wants (even to overturn term limits which was put in effect by the public vote).

Now do you want to try and design something unusual or different, you are out of your cotten picking mind.

Where is National shouldn't they step in and help stop this cancer which is destroying the fabric of our profession?

 I believe by putting my name on this blog and pressing the send button I have probably committed professional suicide.
-------------------------------------------
 Firm Owner/Architect
 NYC-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 11-17-2010 15:01
From: Stephen Schles
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?


I think you missed my point entirely.  And of course you are going to stump for the AIA as candidate for secretary of the american institute of architects.

First of all, you say you want me back as a member yet, you say that I don't understand.  You catch more flies with honey than vinegar.  You are trying to sell me a product, it would be better to explain the value of the product than to insult the potential customer.  To say I don't understand is insultingly patronizing.  Plus, you did not state one thing that addressed my concerns. 

I criticized the AIA when I was a member too and nothing ever came of it.  I've only received defensive answers similar to yours, actually more often no response at all.  At least you responded to my concerns, if nothing more than to reprimand me like a recalcitrant child.  It is interesting that you did not mention one thing that the AIA has, is or will be doing to improve the profession, just that I need to be educated.  Since I am so woefully uninformed, here is your chance to enlighten me on the value of the AIA.

You say the AIA is doing stuff.  This is your chance to convince me and others.  Just what exactly is the AIA doing to promote and protect the profession?  This forum is certainly not enough for me to pay your dues.  This enlightens the public and protects the profession zero.  I started talking in here because I wanted to see how others feel and to let it be known why I left the AIA.  I'm by no means the only architect that I know that is underwhelmed with the AIA. 

If you want to keep, maintain and attract members, you need to first, not insult them.  Second, have value.  Third, be able to explain that value.  To me, I would value the AIA if what you do increases my profit more than the cost of my dues.  From my experience, it does not.  I see no economic benefit to the AIA.     

You say I'm not doing anything to improve the profession.  That is false.  I am trying to jar the AIA awake.  You talk about the credible voice we share but the problem is from what I've seen, it is only shared amongst ourselves.  Why do I never see AIA TV commercials educating the public?  I only see the profession's role getting smaller and smaller.

As far as your comments about me being uninformed on Oklahoma.  First, you really like to call me uninformed.  It's amazing that you would want someone as uninformed as me as a member.  Next, all states have stipulations on what type of buildings must have an architect.   What I was talking about was the fact that many states such as North Carolina basically allow engineers to perform architecture, not what type of building requires an architect.  NC has regulations that say for example an architect is needed on a new commercial office building.  Yet, engineers are regularly performing both the architecture and engineering on these buildings simply by labeling the architecture as "E" sheets.  I do agree that what type and size of building requires an architect is just as important and although OK has done a good job differentiating the difference between engineer and architect, it seems to have done a poor job delineating what buildings require an architect.  

However, you are actually making my point for me.  How, why and when did the AIA drop the ball letting the profession of architecture be usurped by other professions in the various states?  How did it come to be that so many building types do not require an architect?  Why didn't the AIA do a better job lobbying to protect the profession and public by ensuring a licensed architect is involved in almost every building project.

Perhaps a fusion of NJ, OK and other laws is the best.   What we need is architecture by architects and not engineers, interior designers, contractors and others.  We need the laws to require and architect to be involved in most every building type and size and to not allow engineers, interior designers and others to perform architecture. And it seems that the AIA did nothing to make sure that this is the case.

So, what has the AIA done to make sure the profession is protected in all states?   What has the AIA done to ensure that only architects can perform architecture?  What has the AIA done to make sure that all building types require an architect?  What has the AIA done to educate the public on the value of architects?  What success have you had?  Success is required for value.  The AIA has been around for a long time but the profession has only become weaker over the years.  The profession has sold off all the engineering, interior design, landscape architecture, urban planning, facilities management, various building types and sizes and other aspects that used to be part of the profession.  If the AIA is our "only credible voice"  why hasn't it spoken?  Or has it spoken but it is impotent?



-------------------------------------------
Stephen Schles
Principal-A3 Asheville Area Architecture, Inc.
Stephen Schles, AIA
Leicester NC
-------------------------------------------

It does not seem to me that architects are going to be extinct but our 'expertise' is being diluted by specialist who are picking off pieces of what was part of our professional responsibilities/knowledge. Specialist for Project Management, Codes, Door hardware and product representatives all are specialist. We are not the only profession that this is happening to. In the Medical profession there are 100s of Surgeon specialist now and Nurses are becoming medical Technictians that are somewhere between a Doctor and a General Nurse.  Part of the problem is we choose to know a little about a lot instead of a lot about a little. The latter is a specialist. On the other hand there is also A LOT out there now to know about so even knowing a little is getting harder. Personally I like working with both the big and the detailed picture, I don't want to be a specialist.  I would like to hear more about what our 'intrinsic value' is which I know I bring and more importantly my clients say I bring but I am having trouble listing.

I agree with Stephen in that our professional PR machine the AIA doesn't seem to be getting the word out to people outside of the profession more, I could be wrong as I'm so focused on getting work these days. I'm impressed with OK's laws stating what Architects can do and what Engineers can do. One engineer I've worked with and am close to loved to sit with the client and make fun of our finish boards. Never mind that we had organized 300,000 sf, located all the equipment, provided the supporting spaces... The client would always ask the engineer's opinion about the finishes proposed. Good natured ribbing but the again we are often seen as the ones doing the 'pretty' stuff and not the 'serious' technical calculated stuff. But then it wouldn't hurt us to get our hands dirty more. And yes it would help if the Architecture Schools were teaching more of how to build even just the basics, but what are the basics?

One value I've brought to a project is the knowledge of why things are being done in a certain way and expressing it in plain english. I have often been the translator of the building process.

One last point. Why don't we get the credit (fees) that lawyers get for writing contracts when we produce a set of drawings with specifications? Why do they get an hourly rate and we get a fixed fee? I've heard of contractors dismissing drawings as the funny papers. (not mine of course). I guess part of the problem is we don't actually build anything we 'just' plan it all. Contractors can say I've built 100 projects this way why should I do it your way? Where as we actually can only say we've drawn a 100 projects. But then given a society that likes it's instantaneous answers and shoot from the hip heros planning is not valued so much while getting it built is.

How do we focus/maximise our efforts to raise the public value of what we do?
David Koons RA
InLay Designs
Brooklyn NY

Let me first say I really enjoy this discussion forum. After practicing for over 34 yrs and building a firm from 2 to 150 with 4 offices in 3 states, and the death of a partner, I have gone back to just me. Wow what a change. But to the point of the discussion. I want to say a few things. First, you can get legal services without an attorney, small claims court and services like Legal Zoom helped me create my PLLC. Doctors now have nurse practicioners and who issue prescriptions. You can sell your own house, and (at least in AZ) build one house a year without a contractors license. There are now Program managers, Project managers who do what we used to do, zoning attorneys that do most of the applications to city and county boards for approvals of new projects that used to be done by architects, and in CA there are licensed building designers (American Institute of Building Designers) and in Nevada you can get a residential designers license, and one of them sets on the licensing board. In AZ recently we licensed home inspectors and put them on our board. (not without a fight) but they had the govenors ear.

As it has been said we are constantly fighting the interior designers to keep them out of practicing architecture without a license. Its a yearly battle in AZ. Contractors provide design services for most residential in AZ, and tell owners its in the construction fee. Now is the profession going to become extinct? I think not, but it is going to morf into something different than it was when I started. I agree that this is the one area AIA should concentrate more on and if we can believe their figures that over 75% of their members and licensed practicioners are in firms of less than 5 people, we need to demand that they begin to pay attention to the issue.

In AZ we began years ago to work closely with building departments to get them to require architects on all commercial projects, even small TIs. Residential is another issue. We have looked into legislation and cannot agree on a fair process that all organizations will approve or convince legislatures its in the best interest of the public.

It is tough enough in our profession without each year having someone else tap into what we feel we have been educated and trained to do. How many of you now have LEED after your name. I was in a meeting of students a year or so ago and most of them told me they were going to get their LEED certificate and forget about an architects license. They felt the architects license was too expensive to get and you only got sued. They can work for another architect and let him/her stamp the drawings. The recent suit filed against LEED may change all that.

We need to be vigilant as a profession and practicioners and make sure our professional organization pay attention to our needs out here in the trenches. And I cannot emphasize more the importance of joining and being actively involved in your local chapters government affairs committee. WE NEED TO EDUCATE OUR LEGISLATORS WHAT WE DO IS IMPORTANT.

-------------------------------------------
Ronald Peters AIA
President
HistoricStreetscapes PLLC
Mesa AZ
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-05-2010 02:14
From: Tara Imani
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

Hi Craig,

I appreciate your thoughtful response to my earlier post.  I agree with you, I too, see great works of architecture being carried out everyday, too. 

Setting aside the sensationalism of the thread title, I am concerned about the high rate of unemployment amongst licensed architects and the lack of new positions available for new graduates.  If we're not facing all-out extinction- which we obviously are not- what we are facing is both underemployment and under-utilization of architectural services, in my opinion.

You have said a few important things that I wanted to respond to:

///I agree with Mr. Rawlings that we need a greater presence in the residential sector. I don't like the idea of legislating such a presence, unless it is clearly part of government's mandate to protect the public's "health, safety, and welfare" (an expression that can be debated endlessly).///

I totally agree with you both that we need a greater presence in the residential sector.

I also like the idea that someone else had brought up on the blog- that is, "if it needs a permit, it needs an architect's stamp."  Why not?  Do we not need to hire an attorney if we want to file a legal action?  And do we not need a doctor's order or signature to obtain medical services or get a prescription filled?  Likewise, the public should need an architect to design and stamp drawings whenever they seek to build a shelter...no matter how small it is (as long as someone's going to be living in it; or storing items/substances/chemicals that require certain design parameters).  I think this is a reasonable, logical point.   Would you agree?
 
///I don't have any ideas on how to make our presence greater. After 40 years of practice, the problem seems to be the same: not enough of the public sees the value of our work.///

Could it be that the public doesn't value our services because we sometimes don't place enough proper value on them ourselves?


///Yes, we need financial reform. I don't look to the government to do much about it, however. One can legislate endlessly.///

I also agree with you that we need financial reform and need it asap.

Donald Trump was interviewed by Greta van Susteran on Fox News a few nights ago.  He was concerned about how the U.S. has allowed a trade deficit with China to erode our economy.  He suggested a 25% tax on all imports coming from China into the U.S.  I think this is a brilliant idea.  As he added, this would help push companies to begin manufacturing those same items over here.  He was referring to the many building products that he purchases in bulk to construct his many projects.  He also mentioned how his friends who travel to China remarked how fantastic the architecture is over there- the brand new airports and public transportation systems compared to the rundown, aging LaGuardia airport and other infrastructure here in the U.S.  He said, "We're starting to look like a "Banana Republic" compared to them!"   Personally, I'm not excited about doing projects for China when our own country is in need of much renovation and rebuilding.  We need to stop and think about this: we are in debt to China up to our eyeballs, yet, we continue to buy most of our goods from China...how can we support this?  It is unsustainable.

///The real solutions to these problems lie within each one of us as individuals.///

I agree with you here; that is well said and so true.  For me personally, I think it is much easier to bounce back from tough times the younger we are; or maybe for moms like me, it's more difficult to juggle an intense job search and/or seek new clients while maintaining a balance between career and home/family. 

///Some pundit who's name escapes me once said "Don't confuse money with wealth". We have Ivy League graduates who haven't figured that out yet.///

So true.  I'm not sure what the point of this statement is, though, relative to this conversation... can you please expound? 

Thank you, again, for your comments Craig.  It is much appreciated.

Sincerely yours,

Tara

-------------------------------------------
Tara Imani AIA
Principal
Tara Imani Designs, LLC
Houston TX
-------------------------------------------

Very well said Mr. Bagley. The question of regulation and over regulation are critical to the practice of architecture.

-------------------------------------------
Wayne Benson AIA
Principal
R & K Architectural Associates Inc.
Braintree MA
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-04-2010 15:42
From: Craig Bagley
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

I don't believe the profession is approaching extinction. That question has been asked every decade I've been in practice (approaching 40 years now). I see good work out there all the time.

Mr. Rawlings' post makes some excellent points.  We have a lot to offer even the "mass market", using even the simplest principles learned early on in college. Despite what I can observe as numerous examples of good residential architecture, I'm not convinced the "mass market" is getting any better in an overall sense. In terms of energy consumption, the answer I believe is "yes". There are other issues, however. I'm disappointed by oversized homes, a result of over-consumption, and the inclination to look at a home as an "investment". Real estate speculation exacerbates the issue.

I'm using the term "mass market" rather loosely, and it's not meant as a putdown. It does get a lot of people in homes at reasonable  prices, who otherwise wouldn't have a home.

Our profession has been aided by government regulation, adding complexity to a process that used to be relatively simple back in the 1960s. The process has become too complicated, especially here in California. Someone once described the "new economy" as "information intensive". That would certainly describe the LEED process. It would be nice to see some macro statistics from reliable sources, to let us know if all all this  extra effort is producing real efficiencies, or if all we are doing is keeping a small army of technocrats and bureaucrats employed.

I agree with Mr. Rawlings that we need a greater presence in the residential sector. I don't like the idea of legislating such a presence, unless it is clearly part of government's mandate to protect the public's "health, safety, and welfare" (an expression that can be debated endlessly). I don't have any ideas on how to make our presence greater. After 40 years of practice, the problem seems to be the same: not enough of the public sees the value of our work.

Yes, we need financial reform. I don't look to the government to do much about it, however. One can legislate endlessly. Some of it will do some good, but it doesn't take long for those who make money off of money to find new financial games to play. There's an "end around" every effort to correct these periodic financial crises, given enough time. This is not to denigrate the legislative process; it takes a great deal of wisdom to strike the right balance, and more legislation isn't always better. The real solutions to these problems lie within each one of us as individuals. Some pundit who's name escapes me once said "Don't confuse money with wealth". We have Ivy League graduates who haven't figured that out yet.

-------------------------------------------
Craig Bagley AIA
Owner
Craig Bagley Architect
Santa Cruz CA
-------------------------------------------

Craig Bagley said "After 40 years of practice, the problem seems to be the same: not enough of the public sees the value of our work."

After 35 years of practice, I agree.  So why is this not THE ESSENTIAL service provided by the AIA ?  Few of us have the time, expertise, or funds to fully educate the public marketplace about the value of good design, planning, and the value-added role of architects.  But, together, with AIA's prominence we could.

Most other trade and professional associations do this constantly for their members.  AIA does lots of good things and I've been supportive as a member for 30+ years, but I think this educational/marketing development task should be number 1, 2, and 3.

Why do most house buyers feel convinced they MUST have a Realtor to buy or sell property, but not an Architect to guide planning, design, construction decisions ?    

Why do most banks require certified appraisers for any project financing, but not licensed Architects for projects

involving planning, development, design, construction ?

Why do most municipalities still not require or advise people submitting project plans that they should or must  have them prepared by a licensed Architect ?  Am I wrong about this, in your experience ?  Certainly true in PA.

There seems to be a belief that Architects are not really essential to a proper project outcome.  Who is responsible for that ?

Am I missing something ?

Thanks for your thoughts.

Gene

-------------------------

Eugene Aleci AIA
Architect / President
Community Heritage Partners, LLC
Lancaster PA
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-04-2010 15:42
From: Craig Bagley
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

I don't believe the profession is approaching extinction. That question has been asked every decade I've been in practice (approaching 40 years now). I see good work out there all the time.

Mr. Rawlings' post makes some excellent points.  We have a lot to offer even the "mass market", using even the simplest principles learned early on in college. Despite what I can observe as numerous examples of good residential architecture, I'm not convinced the "mass market" is getting any better in an overall sense. In terms of energy consumption, the answer I believe is "yes". There are other issues, however. I'm disappointed by oversized homes, a result of over-consumption, and the inclination to look at a home as an "investment". Real estate speculation exacerbates the issue.

I'm using the term "mass market" rather loosely, and it's not meant as a putdown. It does get a lot of people in homes at reasonable  prices, who otherwise wouldn't have a home.

Our profession has been aided by government regulation, adding complexity to a process that used to be relatively simple back in the 1960s. The process has become too complicated, especially here in California. Someone once described the "new economy" as "information intensive". That would certainly describe the LEED process. It would be nice to see some macro statistics from reliable sources, to let us know if all all this  extra effort is producing real efficiencies, or if all we are doing is keeping a small army of technocrats and bureaucrats employed.

I agree with Mr. Rawlings that we need a greater presence in the residential sector. I don't like the idea of legislating such a presence, unless it is clearly part of government's mandate to protect the public's "health, safety, and welfare" (an expression that can be debated endlessly). I don't have any ideas on how to make our presence greater. After 40 years of practice, the problem seems to be the same: not enough of the public sees the value of our work.

Yes, we need financial reform. I don't look to the government to do much about it, however. One can legislate endlessly. Some of it will do some good, but it doesn't take long for those who make money off of money to find new financial games to play. There's an "end around" every effort to correct these periodic financial crises, given enough time. This is not to denigrate the legislative process; it takes a great deal of wisdom to strike the right balance, and more legislation isn't always better. The real solutions to these problems lie within each one of us as individuals. Some pundit who's name escapes me once said "Don't confuse money with wealth". We have Ivy League graduates who haven't figured that out yet.

-------------------------------------------
Craig Bagley AIA
Owner
Craig Bagley Architect
Santa Cruz CA
-------------------------------------------

I agree that not enough of the public values our work in the residential arena and that the AIA must do more to counteract this.  However, we as architects need to understand that EVERYONE has been exposed to a house from infancy, therefore in the mind of the typcal person on the street, they know what goes into a house and are perfectly capable of designing it themselves, thank you very much.  I guarantee you that most people feel that they can and should save money by eliminating the architect.  Why?  Because our basic services are perceived as costly, our designs are seen as unnecessarily complex and costly to build, our services are perceived as being a cause for delay in the project which drives up cost, and their builder has probably told them his guy in the shop can draft their plans faster and cheaper.

Numerous other professions have eroded the architect's value as well by lobbying to allow them to submit plans for residential projects without the benefit of an architect's stamp.  Interior designers, for one, have been working to expand their field into whole house design.  Builders have employed draftsmen to draw plans for clients rather than having them contact an architect.  There are lighting designers to draw and specify your lighting, kitchen designers to specify and draw your cabinetry, and even Lowes and Home Depot to help you put together an interiors, plumbing, cabinetry, appliance, and lighting package.  In most municipalities the building community has convinced the inspectors and plans examiners that architects are not necessary since all these other resources are available, and we as a profession (or the AIA as an organization) have done nothing to contradict that.

The fact of the matter (and something which the AIA has been silent about to the public from what I can see) is that architects can save clients money.  By designing an efficient floorplan which takes into account structure, mechanical and plumbing (as well as everything else) the architect can eliminate the need for last minute change orders in the field and promote efficiency in the construction.  By working with the client's needs and dreams the architect can maximize the value of the built area for the client and eliminate unnecessary circulation, make sure the furniture will work in the spaces, and even make sure there is room for small things like the light switch and towel bars.  Working with an architect up front will save you money in the construction phase, and will get the client a much better product in the end.  The guy in the shop, the lighting designer, the helper at Lowes or at Home Depot, and even most interior designers for the most part can't look at the whole picture at once, but an architect can.

That is the message that needs to come across:  that architects are not specialists or just designers, we are looking at the whole picture.  We look at site, structure, adjacencies, clearances, building systems, even furniture layouts and make sure everything works together in a harmonious whole. 

If we don't, we deserve the rap we're getting.

-------------------------------------------
Mary Holley AIA
President
Mary A. Avjian Architect P.C.
Basalt CO
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 11-05-2010 10:03
From: Eugene Aleci
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

Craig Bagley said "After 40 years of practice, the problem seems to be the same: not enough of the public sees the value of our work."

After 35 years of practice, I agree.  So why is this not THE ESSENTIAL service provided by the AIA ?  Few of us have the time, expertise, or funds to fully educate the public marketplace about the value of good design, planning, and the value-added role of architects.  But, together, with AIA's prominence we could.

Most other trade and professional associations do this constantly for their members.  AIA does lots of good things and I've been supportive as a member for 30+ years, but I think this educational/marketing development task should be number 1, 2, and 3.

Why do most house buyers feel convinced they MUST have a Realtor to buy or sell property, but not an Architect to guide planning, design, construction decisions ?    

Why do most banks require certified appraisers for any project financing, but not licensed Architects for projects

involving planning, development, design, construction ?

Why do most municipalities still not require or advise people submitting project plans that they should or must  have them prepared by a licensed Architect ?  Am I wrong about this, in your experience ?  Certainly true in PA.

There seems to be a belief that Architects are not really essential to a proper project outcome.  Who is responsible for that ?

Am I missing something ?

 

Thanks for your thoughts.

 

Gene

 

 

-------------------------

Eugene Aleci AIA
Architect / President
Community Heritage Partners, LLC
Lancaster PA
-------------------------------------------







Original Message:
Sent: 11-04-2010 15:42
From: Craig Bagley
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

I don't believe the profession is approaching extinction. That question has been asked every decade I've been in practice (approaching 40 years now). I see good work out there all the time.

 

Mr. Rawlings' post makes some excellent points.  We have a lot to offer even the "mass market", using even the simplest principles learned early on in college. Despite what I can observe as numerous examples of good residential architecture, I'm not convinced the "mass market" is getting any better in an overall sense. In terms of energy consumption, the answer I believe is "yes". There are other issues, however. I'm disappointed by oversized homes, a result of over-consumption, and the inclination to look at a home as an "investment". Real estate speculation exacerbates the issue.

 

I'm using the term "mass market" rather loosely, and it's not meant as a putdown. It does get a lot of people in homes at reasonable  prices, who otherwise wouldn't have a home.

 

Our profession has been aided by government regulation, adding complexity to a process that used to be relatively simple back in the 1960s. The process has become too complicated, especially here in California. Someone once described the "new economy" as "information intensive". That would certainly describe the LEED process. It would be nice to see some macro statistics from reliable sources, to let us know if all all this  extra effort is producing real efficiencies, or if all we are doing is keeping a small army of technocrats and bureaucrats employed.

 

I agree with Mr. Rawlings that we need a greater presence in the residential sector. I don't like the idea of legislating such a presence, unless it is clearly part of government's mandate to protect the public's "health, safety, and welfare" (an expression that can be debated endlessly). I don't have any ideas on how to make our presence greater. After 40 years of practice, the problem seems to be the same: not enough of the public sees the value of our work.

 

Yes, we need financial reform. I don't look to the government to do much about it, however. One can legislate endlessly. Some of it will do some good, but it doesn't take long for those who make money off of money to find new financial games to play. There's an "end around" every effort to correct these periodic financial crises, given enough time. This is not to denigrate the legislative process; it takes a great deal of wisdom to strike the right balance, and more legislation isn't always better. The real solutions to these problems lie within each one of us as individuals. Some pundit who's name escapes me once said "Don't confuse money with wealth". We have Ivy League graduates who haven't figured that out yet.

 

 

-------------------------------------------
Craig Bagley AIA
Owner
Craig Bagley Architect
Santa Cruz CA
-------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------------
James Vinson AIA
Architect
James T. Vinson, Architect
Raleigh NC
-------------------------------------------
If "They" did away with architects, someone would have to do what we do.  Call it something else, but architecture is basic stuff -- food, clothing, and shelter.





Original Message:
Sent: 11-05-2010 14:03
From: Mary Holley
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

I agree that not enough of the public values our work in the residential arena and that the AIA must do more to counteract this.  However, we as architects need to understand that EVERYONE has been exposed to a house from infancy, therefore in the mind of the typcal person on the street, they know what goes into a house and are perfectly capable of designing it themselves, thank you very much.  I guarantee you that most people feel that they can and should save money by eliminating the architect.  Why?  Because our basic services are perceived as costly, our designs are seen as unnecessarily complex and costly to build, our services are perceived as being a cause for delay in the project which drives up cost, and their builder has probably told them his guy in the shop can draft their plans faster and cheaper.

Numerous other professions have eroded the architect's value as well by lobbying to allow them to submit plans for residential projects without the benefit of an architect's stamp.  Interior designers, for one, have been working to expand their field into whole house design.  Builders have employed draftsmen to draw plans for clients rather than having them contact an architect.  There are lighting designers to draw and specify your lighting, kitchen designers to specify and draw your cabinetry, and even Lowes and Home Depot to help you put together an interiors, plumbing, cabinetry, appliance, and lighting package.  In most municipalities the building community has convinced the inspectors and plans examiners that architects are not necessary since all these other resources are available, and we as a profession (or the AIA as an organization) have done nothing to contradict that.

The fact of the matter (and something which the AIA has been silent about to the public from what I can see) is that architects can save clients money.  By designing an efficient floorplan which takes into account structure, mechanical and plumbing (as well as everything else) the architect can eliminate the need for last minute change orders in the field and promote efficiency in the construction.  By working with the client's needs and dreams the architect can maximize the value of the built area for the client and eliminate unnecessary circulation, make sure the furniture will work in the spaces, and even make sure there is room for small things like the light switch and towel bars.  Working with an architect up front will save you money in the construction phase, and will get the client a much better product in the end.  The guy in the shop, the lighting designer, the helper at Lowes or at Home Depot, and even most interior designers for the most part can't look at the whole picture at once, but an architect can.

That is the message that needs to come across:  that architects are not specialists or just designers, we are looking at the whole picture.  We look at site, structure, adjacencies, clearances, building systems, even furniture layouts and make sure everything works together in a harmonious whole. 

If we don't, we deserve the rap we're getting.

-------------------------------------------
Mary Holley AIA
President
Mary A. Avjian Architect P.C.
Basalt CO
-------------------------------------------

Tara, et al,
Just my personal thoughts and misinformation.

I haven't been a solo practioner as long as others posting. I have 25 years experience in commercial architecture as an architectural designer and in large architectural firms, and including multi family residential projects; and 8 years as an architectural commercial design consultant and single family home architect. My take on the evolving nature of the profession is to take back the role of architect as master builder, as others have been saying. I don't see enough fees to be sustainable as a designer only. From what I can see, there are not enough projects for design only and the arch firms I see surviving, when so many are failing, are those that have arrangements to take advantage of money generated by the reasonable fees earned on the construction side. Architects take the liability hits anyway by being held accountable for shortcomings thru the construction processs and architects' reputation with clients suffers by bad budgeting and being blamed for all the construction ills by an outside contractor talking directly with the owner. Why not take responsibility (and a chance for profit) by at least associating with a contractor. Working together as a team to deliver a project on time and on budget as a turnkey operation has large upsides to repeat client business. You can still perform as an independent design firm if that is what your client or contractor requires. However, your fees have to be larger as a separate design firm to a client or contractor, to respond to those parts of which you are not in control. The strange thing is that as abuilder you can actually be more in charge of where the money can be spent on key design elements. Obviously, working with a client and responding and accommodating all their input is tantamount to the process either as an independent design firm or as a design build project. Part of the process is education and persuasion for either version, but having responsibility for both design and build on time and on budget are convincing marketing tools.

I have seen Revit as an extremely powerful tool both for design and cd's. Especially for small project practioners. It is the way of the future. I can draw and design in 3D by hand. I am learning Revit, which is no doubt onerous, as fast as I can, because I have seen 1 person do the design and presentation so quickly and perform cds much faster, given all its tools. Details are still faster in Autocad, aqnd can be imported job to job and from past projects detailed in Autocad. It imports and exports as Autocad files for engineering disciplines, who may not currently use Revit, but for "clash detection" and shop drawing and fewer change orders, especially now in medical facilities, are so "cost savings" effective that contractors are hiring firms to build BIM models even after the project was built in 2d modelling. And they are requiring their subs to build and submit 3D speeding up submissions and fabrication and minimizing potential field conflicts.

I think LEED programs are eventually going to work in a widespread application within code requirements (e.g. ADA requirements) and not as separate documentation which are large costs impacts on more competitive shrinking design fees. Green and sustainable elements can be incorporated into any project. Saying that a project is platinum, gold, etc. is very good PR for those projects which can afford them. I get 3rd party certification as a key component to verifying anticipated performance, but I've read enough stories about measured building post occupancy performance falling short of designed performance to know that the actual performance over time does not match designed LEED certified performance. There is no question that a LEED designed building will out perform a non Leed project. I don't think there is enough actual building performance over time to fully justify the entire LEED certification. It is better than any other approach currently although I am aware and have researched other more stringent systems for environmentally responsible design that go beyond LEED certification requirements.
Sprinklered buildings ahve been proven more effective fire containment projects than non-sprinklered projects, but cost is a justifiable consideration of their requirement to put them in every structure.

Get your architect license as soon as possible. Being able to stamp as an architect provides you much more flexibility in how you can control your own destiny than being able to review or certify as a LEED AP. Architect license is a law in most states, LEED AP is not (yet?).

Just one opinion and perspective trying to read the tea leaves and clouds in the architectural coffee.
-------------------------------------------
Peter Brinckerhoff AIA LEED AP
Brinckerhoff and Associates LLC
Skokie IL
-------------------------------------------

From here it appears that we architects now find ourselves in a situation comparable to medical doctors.

To a great extent the once grand practice of medicine has devolved into assembly line work with almost every aspect, including fees, dictated by insurance companies.

Similarly, "architecture" is now largely defined by the bureaucratic complexities of countless overlapping and often contradictory codes, regulations, and questionable third party parameters such as LEED, which are too often developed and enforced by people whose understanding is narrow and naive.

My doctor now spends more time looking at her computer screen than me. I believe we architects have fallen into the same trap.


-------------------------------------------
Robert Matschulat AIA
Architect, Educational Facility Planner
Edutecture, LLC
Lakewood CO
-------------------------------------------






Original Message:
Sent: 11-03-2010 14:26
From: Peter Brinckerhoff
Subject: The Role of Architects: Is the Profession Approaching Extinction?

Tara, et al,
Just my personal thoughts and misinformation.

I haven't been a solo practioner as long as others posting. I have 25 years experience in commercial architecture as an architectural designer and in large architectural firms, and including multi family residential projects; and 8 years as an architectural commercial design consultant and single family home architect. My take on the evolving nature of the profession is to take back the role of architect as master builder, as others have been saying. I don't see enough fees to be sustainable as a designer only. From what I can see, there are not enough projects for design only and the arch firms I see surviving, when so many are failing, are those that have arrangements to take advantage of money generated by the reasonable fees earned on the construction side. Architects take the liability hits anyway by being held accountable for shortcomings thru the construction processs and architects' reputation with clients suffers by bad budgeting and being blamed for all the construction ills by an outside contractor talking directly with the owner. Why not take responsibility (and a chance for profit) by at least associating with a contractor. Working together as a team to deliver a project on time and on budget as a turnkey operation has large upsides to repeat client business. You can still perform as an independent design firm if that is what your client or contractor requires. However, your fees have to be larger as a separate design firm to a client or contractor, to respond to those parts of which you are not in control. The strange thing is that as abuilder you can actually be more in charge of where the money can be spent on key design elements. Obviously, working with a client and responding and accommodating all their input is tantamount to the process either as an independent design firm or as a design build project. Part of the process is education and persuasion for either version, but having responsibility for both design and build on time and on budget are convincing marketing tools.

I have seen Revit as an extremely powerful tool both for design and cd's. Especially for small project practioners. It is the way of the future. I can draw and design in 3D by hand. I am learning Revit, which is no doubt onerous, as fast as I can, because I have seen 1 person do the design and presentation so quickly and perform cds much faster, given all its tools. Details are still faster in Autocad, aqnd can be imported job to job and from past projects detailed in Autocad. It imports and exports as Autocad files for engineering disciplines, who may not currently use Revit, but for "clash detection" and shop drawing and fewer change orders, especially now in medical facilities, are so "cost savings" effective that contractors are hiring firms to build BIM models even after the project was built in 2d modelling. And they are requiring their subs to build and submit 3D speeding up submissions and fabrication and minimizing potential field conflicts.

I think LEED programs are eventually going to work in a widespread application within code requirements (e.g. ADA requirements) and not as separate documentation which are large costs impacts on more competitive shrinking design fees. Green and sustainable elements can be incorporated into any project. Saying that a project is platinum, gold, etc. is very good PR for those projects which can afford them. I get 3rd party certification as a key component to verifying anticipated performance, but I've read enough stories about measured building post occupancy performance falling short of designed performance to know that the actual performance over time does not match designed LEED certified performance. There is no question that a LEED designed building will out perform a non Leed project. I don't think there is enough actual building performance over time to fully justify the entire LEED certification. It is better than any other approach currently although I am aware and have researched other more stringent systems for environmentally responsible design that go beyond LEED certification requirements.
Sprinklered buildings ahve been proven more effective fire containment projects than non-sprinklered projects, but cost is a justifiable consideration of their requirement to put them in every structure.

Get your architect license as soon as possible. Being able to stamp as an architect provides you much more flexibility in how you can control your own destiny than being able to review or certify as a LEED AP. Architect license is a law in most states, LEED AP is not (yet?).

Just one opinion and perspective trying to read the tea leaves and clouds in the architectural coffee.
-------------------------------------------
Peter Brinckerhoff AIA LEED AP
Brinckerhoff and Associates LLC
Skokie IL
-------------------------------------------

As there are many ways to approach a practice in our profession, there are some approaches I believe that will fade into extinction while others will become more prominent.  The recent rise of the design-build model is one example.  Certainly the Frank Lloyd Wright / Howard Rourk approach of Architect as tyrannical master builder with total control is no more.  I came to my sole proprietorship after 20 years of working for firms doing schools and hospitals in the Design-Bid-Build model, and quickly learned that model would not work with the small-town house builders who were my new collaborators.  They were unaccustomed and unwilling to submit a firm competitive bid and stick to it, and many of the homeowners were unwilling to pay me for the additional time it would take to create the detail required for competitive bids.

So moving from institutional design to small and mostly low-end residential changed at least 3 aspects of how I do business:  level of detail in the documents, contractor selection and negotiation, and my fee structure.  While a school or a hospital has little choice but to engage a design firm if they want a building or addition, homeowners do have other choices.  Just as few of us ever buy any custom clothing but rather buy off the rack, most new-home clients come to me with plans already selected, and often in NY state it is possible for them get a small addition or even a small house done working directly with a builder and no architect.  For clients like that, I see my evolved role in the profession as that of early problem avoider;  the service  I bring to the table is the ability to show the clients 3D models of their project which they can understand, allowing them to improve the look of their additions or avoid site problems with their published plans in ways the builders (so far) cannot offer.  In this way I find addition projects usually much more interesting and satisfying than helping somebody get their internet plan built.  Additions give me the opportunity to use some real creative thinking to solve functional problems while maintaining or enhancing the established esthetics, and to use all my CAD rendering capabilities to convince the clients.

The other aspect that informs my role as architect is New York's requirements for licensed architects or engineers to produce (or review) projects beyond certain thresholds-  I gather from the thread that this is not the case in every state, but indeed for most homes and additions in NY a stamp IS required.  This has the effect of forcing some clients to hire an architect when they otherwise would not.  Part of my goal is to show such clients the ways in which I offer value compared with the builder (primarily the ability to visualize the finished project and avoid mistakes) while charging a fee that will feel appropriate to them.  Since they didn't want to hire me in the first place, I try to work as efficiently as possible, usually at an hourly rate, so that they can see the value received for their money.  True, the fees I end up charging are way below the percentages architects used to get, but as a sole practitioner with no employees I'm able to earn enough, doing lots of small jobs for small fees which come and go quickly.  At the same time I am giving people some architectural service that they would never buy at the old 8- or 10- or 12% of construction cost fee structure.  So-  a different role for the architect, but not extinction.  Are others working this way too?

-------------------------------------------
Bruce Ward AIA
Proprietor
Hamilton NY
-------------------------------------------