I've been reading along, and mostly agreeing, with each of you. As a one-man architect in a specialty practice, I have not been in "general practice" for over 30 years. My work involves addressing moisture issues with the building envelope. The vast majority of my work is existing residential (75%) and commercial (25%) construction. Sometimes I will work with an architect and/or GC prior to/during construction to ward off problems. To me, it appears we ran ourselves off from working in the residential sector, thinking (in all too many cases) that type of work was "below" us. Recently there's a plentiful availability of "store-bought" plans, and builders ("I know how to build a good house. Who needs an architect??") who brainwash homeowners into thinking more about cost than value. Architects HAVE virtually disappeared. Sadly, so has the "master builder". Generally speaking, a lot of the custom home markets have "brokers"--those who hire the cheapest subs from job to job, have no overhead, and know how to make a house pretty enough to sell. Consequently, without a good set of plans and specs, there's no one there to "weave" the house together so it doesn't leak. And that's a big problem. Houses are built to sell, not built to last. Additionally, families are moving more often Tear-downs alter the landscape to where there is less guilt about destroying a "good" house. I still say the architecture education needs to include more practicality and less theory. Yes, book-learning has its place, but there also needs to be more "hands-on" in both architects' offices and out in the fields of construction. If architects can get more input as to the realities of construction, maybe they can better sell prospective owners on their value, as opposed to their absence "saving money".
-------------------------------------------
Harrison McCampbell AIA
Owner/Architect
McCampbell & Associates, AIA
Brentwood TN
-------------------------------------------