This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Residential Knowledge Community and Committee on Design .
-------------------------------------------
In my residential practice here in California, I've been living with Title 24 energy requirements that require efficiency for more than 10 years. These were expanded over recent years to include lighting efficiency. The Title 24 limits created a demand for more efficient lighting fixtures and bulbs, and the manufacturers have responded with more elegant and efficient fixtures and better quality light sources. I see this latest round of energy requirements as an expansion of this trend. I anticipate that we will struggle to find efficient materials and methods for a few years and then the market place will respond with new products. This appears to be the natural course of change, or evolution, for our profession. I do not see it as taking away my creativity as a designer. This is how we move toward a less-demanding impact on our environment.
I have also seen my practice evolve into a "team" effort. In 1971, when I graduated from CAL, I could sign off on everything necessary to submit my designs, including engineering. Now I work with a team that includes a structural engineer, civil engineer, landscape architect, interior designer and energy consultant. Now I will add a Green Point Rater to my team. I am still the creative source for the project, and if I select and manage my team well, we can create a collaborative project that follows my vision and meets my client's needs.
I am not upset with new energy requirements, but I am upset with the ever-increasing impact of local Planning requirements on my projects. Planning has become the real enemy of my design because it imposes ambiguous limits for political reasons. My projects are never built to the potential of my vision due to the arbitrary limits imposed by local planning, with staff, boards and commissions who are not trained as designers and are fearful of local political backlash. We are building generation after generation of designs with reduced potential, a form of mediocracy that will impose its impact on our culture for the life of the buildings. A mediocre environment can only breed more mediocrity.
So if you want to talk about "the end of architecture" let's turn away from our fears about building green and take a closer look at stopping the way planners are creating an ever-more-mediocre environment. I've never seen a full-on discussion about the impact of bad (politically-motivated) planning at the AIA. How about a series of workshops at the next convention?
-------------------------------------------
David Ludwig AIA
David Ludwig Design
San Anselmo CA
-------------------------------------------