|
|
|
|
As much as I would like to see Architect's stamps being required for residential projects nationally, we will need many, many more Architects designing houses first. If we can't facilitate the demand, in particular in rural states, then this would be a short lived effort ending in total chaos. Some states like NY & NJ may already have the "boots on the ground" for this sort of concept, but beyond Atlanta, I couldn't see the state of GA being capable of requiring this based on the lack of residential Architects in the rural areas. This move will have to be on a jurisdiction by jurisdiction basis, based on need and available resources. Good design to me is taking the same kit of pieces and parts and simply arranging it better than the other guy/gal. This philosophy has allowed me to push the design bar while not pricing regular people out of getting a bank loan. If we could get the bank's appraiser to understand that separating the price of the Lot from the price of the House itself, we would be able to more accurately determine what people are really willing to pay for. By removing "Location" from the equation, there is no need to compare houses that incomparable just because they're in the same "Location". We could have large houses and small houses, rich and not-so-rich living side by side. The current valuation system simply focuses on the area only and gives little consideration as to whether one house is more desirable than the other. They simply average the sales of houses in your area that happen to be the same size. I've seen one of my highest sales on everyones appraisal in the area. They are all justifying a higher value because one of my houses sold for much more than theirs. If they had to accept the value of the houses THEY sold, then I wouldn't get punished by their low sales and they would't get rewarded by my higher sales. The price of the Lot should reflect current market value of the land and the house price could be determined by how well that Architect or Builder's houses sell in any area. Isolate the mystery of location and market value for land, then the structure should have a more stable value based on desirability, like all other products in America. We have Kia and we have BMW, we have Levi and Armani, we have Timex and Rolex. Appraisers can determine that one brand is more valuable than another, but real estate appraisers can't tell the difference between a unique Architectural house and a cookie cutter mass produced house. If you separate the Lot from the House, we would begin to see what people are willing to pay between a mass produced house and one that is designed specifically for the lot it sits on by a professional Architect. All we have to bring to the table is our design skills. All this can accomplish is providing better quality. If better quality can't be tracked by real sales figures, then design just doesn't matter in the fiscal equation. For us to matter, we need to make sure that our products are being judged fairly at market. This is a country obsessed with higher quality jeans, purses, cars, watches, electronics, etc. Everything but better houses. We can't form a brand when we are judged by how well our competitors are doing rather than how well we do. If design mattered to the bank, then the people would quickly get it. Who would buy a Rolex for Rolex prices if they were valued the same as a Timex, just because they're sold in the same store (location)? People pay more for many reasons and perceived value is one of them. ------------------------------------------- Eric Rawlings AIA Owner Rawlings Design, Inc. Decatur GA -------------------------------------------
Show Original Message
-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 06-11-2012 12:08
From: David Del Vecchio
Subject: AIA Membership Support
Some states (like New Jersey) do require an architect's seal for residential construction. It's about time AIA lobbies heavily to make that a reality in every jurisdiction in the U.S.
How is it that the single largest expenditure most people ever make is not as worthy of the protection afforded by licensure as every other building? How is the building we all go home to after a hard day's work not as important in terms of health, safety and welfare as a WalMart or McDonald's? Why is it that nobody (other than architects) understand that even though houses may look much the same as they have for years, that they use much more complex building materials, are used much differently, consume more energy, and incorporate much more complicated building systems (or should) than the houses that were built a generation ago? Density, over-crowding, traffic and other land use issues that were not nearly so important a few decades ago are having a greater impact on the built environment than ever before.
Homes are just as important as every other place where we spend our day. And frankly the decisions that need to be made should not be entrusted to just anyone who wants to call themselves a contractor.
I know that when I get a call from someone who says they "need an architect because the building department told me I needed to get one" that it is not likely to fit my ideal target market, but I do believe that by requiring an architect's seal for all buldings, it raises the bar for all projects, and at least gets people thinking beyond an architect as an unnecessary additional expense that can be supplanted by a contractor's drawing.
It's simply no longer acceptable to say, "the laws in my state will never change" or "that will never happen here" or "that would be difficult to make happen given the current state of affairs in our state". It's going to be a long, drawn-out and expensive fight, no doubt.
And if members don't see the value in participating, by opening their checkbooks to their local Architects' Political Action Committees, then somebody else will fund their PAC's to take yet another piece of the pie. They, in fact, already are doing exactly that. It's not a fight that will likely ever be "won" or "done". We will be fighting this fight our entire lives. Our success lies in whether we are willing to put the appropriate effort forward or we choose to sit back and let others dictate what it is that we are allowed to do.
The best way to get something done is to start doing.
-------------------------------------------
David Del Vecchio AIA
Architect
David Del Vecchio, Architect, LLC
Cranford NJ
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 06-11-2012 11:24
From: Craig Isaac
Subject: AIA Membership Support
I think perhaps the easiest answer is that commercial projects require an Achitect's seal where Residential does not. So it gets back to educating the public (and General Contractors) on value of good design and benefits of using Architects.
-------------------------------------------
Craig Isaac AIA
Architect
Craig W. Isaac Architecture
Charlotte NC
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 06-08-2012 15:32
From: Fred Flynn
Subject: AIA Membership Support
I've read some of the discussions on Awards and thumbed through the latest Residential Architect Awards Issue which seems to support much of the negativity presented.
I have been an AIA member for 30 yrs., 20 of those working in large Commercial Firms and the last 10 in my own Residential Practice. The AIA has always been very supportive of the Commercial Sector but I feel they are not as representative of the Residential Sector except for the Awards for Show Houses which most people can't afford nor relate to, which is telling in itself in sending the wrong message to average people who were thinking of using an Architect.
Last year I went to a trade show in SF (PCBC) where I found a booklet entitled "The Value of Design" by Marianne Cusato produced for James Hardie Company which brought forth the question of why doesn't our AIA do as much for us as one of our material providers. Sure the booklet was produced for James Hardie and has it's own purpose, but that's beside the point, it talks about the influence of Good Design, it's importance and what that entails.
Where is the AIA on this issue ? Am I missing something and if I missed it then I'll bet most of the public did as well. Shouldn't we, as an organization be concerned about the influence of Good Design on people and the environment as a whole more than we seem to be in Awards for structures which stand alone.
I would hope that our AIA could help us more in educating a larger public about the Value of Good Design by Residential Architects as a whole at least as much as it does for the Commercial Sector.
Take a few minutes and look through the attached booklet and see what you think.
-------------------------------------------
Fred Flynn AIA
Architect
Fred Flynn Architect
Santa Rosa CA
-------------------------------------------
|
|
Be the first person to recommend this.
|