Custom Residential Architects Network

This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Housing Knowledge Community and Custom Residential Architects Network .
-------------------------------------------
Hurricane Sandy leveled and squashed thousands of people's homes.  If architects and engineers had designed them they would be more standing today.  Less loss of life, less heartache, less loss of insurance payoffs.  It usually takes people dying to change building codes and state laws.  Here's a good reason to change the laws in all 50 states now.  I know I design the homes I design to resist hurricanes and high winds beyond those indicated in the code books.  It takes responsible LICENSED REAL ARCHITECTS to do things like this.  CRAN and AIA: here's a good time to get this going.

-------------------------------------------
Rand Soellner AIA
Architect/Owner/Principal
Home Architects
Cashiers NC
-------------------------------------------

I 100% agree with Mr Sollener, as previously posted many people choose to avoid an Architect to design and guide the whole house process.They find a local designer or buy a ready made plan from a discount plan vendor, then they forget to have the plans confirmed by a local Architect if they could find one who would do this, as this would shift any liability to the Architect looking over the store bought drawings.

As a builder I have built houses both ways, with the store bought plans I have always run into troubles down the road with upset clients blaming me for problems with items that do not work, I built according to the plans and when items within the plans do not fit within the construction process the clients have no one to call to view the field issues. They attempt to have me resolve the problem, my response is call the person who designed the building and have them come out to view the problem and design a fix. The problems that come up, not all, but to mention a few, usually involves rooms not working, roofs not fitting, bearing points left off, (missing footings, mechanical design missing, plumbing details) from the plans. Basically all of the important details that pertain to the clients home interfacing with the new work are missing from the [Store Bought Plans]

Working with an Architect and the designed plans to fit the specific project, I find to be the best scenario, the Architect has direct knowledge of the sight conditions, has thought the project through and placed the clients wants into design that will flow with the existing conditions. That same Architect you can call on the phone if you have a site condition and have a site meeting to resolve any issues. 

If you weigh out the pros and cons of store bought plans vs Architectural designed plans [specific to the project] by the time the construction process is completed I have found that the costs are almost a wash, when you factor in unnecessary down time, change orders that are charged to the project owner to get the store bought plans to fit his project. The Architectural plans designed specific to the project always saves time and money when you factor in the whole project at its completion. These same plans have added value to the project. The end result is a project that blends in with its surroundings and is pleasing to the eye.

So if I have beat to hard on the Chest or Back of that said important "Architect" I say, you should have been wearing your body armor, as a builder it is standard equiptment for our team.

Best Regards, 
-------------------------------------------
Stephen Cook
President
Cook Construction Company
Canoga Park CA 91303
818-438-4535
-------------------------------------------






Show Original Message -------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 10-31-2012 13:04
From: Rand Soellner
Subject: THIS is why only licensed architects should be designing homes

This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Housing Knowledge Community and Custom Residential Architects Network .
-------------------------------------------
Hurricane Sandy leveled and squashed thousands of people's homes.  If architects and engineers had designed them they would be more standing today.  Less loss of life, less heartache, less loss of insurance payoffs.  It usually takes people dying to change building codes and state laws.  Here's a good reason to change the laws in all 50 states now.  I know I design the homes I design to resist hurricanes and high winds beyond those indicated in the code books.  It takes responsible LICENSED REAL ARCHITECTS to do things like this.  CRAN and AIA: here's a good time to get this going.

-------------------------------------------
Rand Soellner AIA
Architect/Owner/Principal
Home Architects
Cashiers NC
-------------------------------------------

God bless you, Stephen!  Thank you.  It is refreshing to hear from a builder, supporting architects who primarily design residential projects.  I have encountered only a few like you, and I and all of CRAN AIA appreciate your perspective.  Builders like you become my lifelong friends.  Builders build.  Architects design.  Together we do what each of us does best.  In the end, we appreciate what each other does and we can have a happy relationship making sure that each of us has the benefits and insights that each of our professions has to offer.  And even better, our mutual clients win.  I certainly respect what builders do as constructors of what I design.  It is nice to hear that some builders respect what architects do.  And by the way, I may have something coming up out there.  Send me an e-mail and let me know if you might be interested: Rand@HomeArchitects.com 

-------------------------------------------
Rand Soellner AIA
Architect/Owner/Principal
Home Architects
Cashiers NC
-------------------------------------------






Show Original Message -------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 11-01-2012 14:47
From: Stephen Cook
Subject: THIS is why only licensed architects should be designing homes

I 100% agree with Mr Sollener, as previously posted many people choose to avoid an Architect to design and guide the whole house process.They find a local designer or buy a ready made plan from a discount plan vendor, then they forget to have the plans confirmed by a local Architect if they could find one who would do this, as this would shift any liability to the Architect looking over the store bought drawings.

As a builder I have built houses both ways, with the store bought plans I have always run into troubles down the road with upset clients blaming me for problems with items that do not work, I built according to the plans and when items within the plans do not fit within the construction process the clients have no one to call to view the field issues. They attempt to have me resolve the problem, my response is call the person who designed the building and have them come out to view the problem and design a fix. The problems that come up, not all, but to mention a few, usually involves rooms not working, roofs not fitting, bearing points left off, (missing footings, mechanical design missing, plumbing details) from the plans. Basically all of the important details that pertain to the clients home interfacing with the new work are missing from the [Store Bought Plans]

Working with an Architect and the designed plans to fit the specific project, I find to be the best scenario, the Architect has direct knowledge of the sight conditions, has thought the project through and placed the clients wants into design that will flow with the existing conditions. That same Architect you can call on the phone if you have a site condition and have a site meeting to resolve any issues. 

If you weigh out the pros and cons of store bought plans vs Architectural designed plans [specific to the project] by the time the construction process is completed I have found that the costs are almost a wash, when you factor in unnecessary down time, change orders that are charged to the project owner to get the store bought plans to fit his project. The Architectural plans designed specific to the project always saves time and money when you factor in the whole project at its completion. These same plans have added value to the project. The end result is a project that blends in with its surroundings and is pleasing to the eye.

So if I have beat to hard on the Chest or Back of that said important "Architect" I say, you should have been wearing your body armor, as a builder it is standard equiptment for our team.

Best Regards, 
-------------------------------------------
Stephen Cook
President
Cook Construction Company
Canoga Park CA 91303
818-438-4535
-------------------------------------------





-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 10-31-2012 13:04
From: Rand Soellner
Subject: THIS is why only licensed architects should be designing homes

This message has been cross posted to the following Discussion Forums: Housing Knowledge Community and Custom Residential Architects Network .
-------------------------------------------
Hurricane Sandy leveled and squashed thousands of people's homes.  If architects and engineers had designed them they would be more standing today.  Less loss of life, less heartache, less loss of insurance payoffs.  It usually takes people dying to change building codes and state laws.  Here's a good reason to change the laws in all 50 states now.  I know I design the homes I design to resist hurricanes and high winds beyond those indicated in the code books.  It takes responsible LICENSED REAL ARCHITECTS to do things like this.  CRAN and AIA: here's a good time to get this going.

-------------------------------------------
Rand Soellner AIA
Architect/Owner/Principal
Home Architects
Cashiers NC
-------------------------------------------

I've been following this discussion and I have one question for all of you:

If some how you managed to convince the rest of the home building industry that you were right, and all homes should be designed by architects then given that architects design only about 3% of new homes in the US each year, then where will all these architects come from to design the rest of these 97% of homes?

Not only that, where will the money come from to pay the fees to design all these homes, which if designed by architects would what? Add 10-15% to the cost of the home for professional services?

I hear architects propose this idea all the time, with never a thought to these most elementary questions. And architects also seem completely unaware of how naive and even ignorant this make architects look, and contributes to it being unlikely that we ever design more than 3% of houses we work on now.

This discussion here has gone on for DAYs, and not one of you has even touched on this most basic question of such a proposal. While you bluster around with such foolish claims you ignore the fact that a small gain from 3% to something like 6% could make a giant difference to residential architects everywhere, and there are actually many things we can probably do about that. 

But you don't. Instead you bluster about all houses being designed by architects, you look foolish, and nothing improves. And I'm not even surprised that this would be case in an AIA interest group of "Custom" residential architects. I've called for a revision of this attitude here before, and it always meets with pushback. I'm sure this will be same.

-------------------------------------------
Gregory La Vardera
Architect
Gregory La Vardera Architect
Merchantville NJ
-------------------------------------------

I agree with Greg 100%,  (well not on politics... but we do love each other anyway!)

It's simply not realistic that custom residential architects can design all housing... the way service delivery works now.  I do think the goal is still possible, to get custom designed housing into the hands of everyone, but more analogous to a team of car designers and engineers producing a race car for Lemans and a mini-van out of the same design facility.

This model has existed in some variants in the past with the Sears Cataloghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sears_Catalog_Home and a wonderful grass roots level today with architects likehttp://www.lamidesign.com/plans/homepg.html Taking this to the masses will require a new business model.

Imagine, if we doulble our influnce from 3% to 6% over the next 10-20 years, Architects would increase by 50% and all be busy.

Peace

Dave

-------------------------------------------
David Andreozzi AIA
Owner
Andreozzi Architects
Barrington RI
-------------------------------------------






Show Original Message -------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 11-02-2012 09:00
From: Gregory La Vardera
Subject: THIS is why only licensed architects should be designing homes

I've been following this discussion and I have one question for all of you:

If some how you managed to convince the rest of the home building industry that you were right, and all homes should be designed by architects then given that architects design only about 3% of new homes in the US each year, then where will all these architects come from to design the rest of these 97% of homes?

Not only that, where will the money come from to pay the fees to design all these homes, which if designed by architects would what? Add 10-15% to the cost of the home for professional services?

I hear architects propose this idea all the time, with never a thought to these most elementary questions. And architects also seem completely unaware of how naive and even ignorant this make architects look, and contributes to it being unlikely that we ever design more than 3% of houses we work on now.

This discussion here has gone on for DAYs, and not one of you has even touched on this most basic question of such a proposal. While you bluster around with such foolish claims you ignore the fact that a small gain from 3% to something like 6% could make a giant difference to residential architects everywhere, and there are actually many things we can probably do about that. 

But you don't. Instead you bluster about all houses being designed by architects, you look foolish, and nothing improves. And I'm not even surprised that this would be case in an AIA interest group of "Custom" residential architects. I've called for a revision of this attitude here before, and it always meets with pushback. I'm sure this will be same.

-------------------------------------------
Gregory La Vardera
Architect
Gregory La Vardera Architect
Merchantville NJ
-------------------------------------------

Thanks, David.

You all might be interested in two projects going on via the AIA:

1. Two other national knowledge communities are co-sponsoring a research grant whereby three members are developing a business model for rehabing historic buildings via a core insertion in order to get these urban homes updated, sold, and inhabited. Jason says it much more eloquently... 
http://network.aia.org/AIA/Blogs/BlogViewer/?BlogKey=3c32881f-7c73-42d7-9268-99eca1cd5c0b

2. There is a Mod/PreFab community on the website. The discussion forum is not nearly as lively as CRAN, but there are good resources and 48 interested member already there.
http://network.aia.org/AIA/Communities/CommunityDetails/?CommunityKey=3341e1eb-52fb-4778-ac0a-797e9fd2eadb


Eric, How did the Reinvention presentation go?

-------------------------------------------
Kathleen Simpson
Manager, Knowledge Communities
The American Institute of Architects
Washington DC
-------------------------------------------






Show Original Message -------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 11-02-2012 09:26
From: David Andreozzi
Subject: THIS is why only licensed architects should be designing homes

I agree with Greg 100%,  (well not on politics... but we do love each other anyway!)

It's simply not realistic that custom residential architects can design all housing... the way service delivery works now.  I do think the goal is still possible, to get custom designed housing into the hands of everyone, but more analogous to a team of car designers and engineers producing a race car for Lemans and a mini-van out of the same design facility.

This model has existed in some variants in the past with the Sears Cataloghttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sears_Catalog_Home and a wonderful grass roots level today with architects likehttp://www.lamidesign.com/plans/homepg.html Taking this to the masses will require a new business model.

Imagine, if we doulble our influnce from 3% to 6% over the next 10-20 years, Architects would increase by 50% and all be busy.

Peace

Dave

-------------------------------------------
David Andreozzi AIA
Owner
Andreozzi Architects
Barrington RI
-------------------------------------------





-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 11-02-2012 09:00
From: Gregory La Vardera
Subject: THIS is why only licensed architects should be designing homes

I've been following this discussion and I have one question for all of you:

If some how you managed to convince the rest of the home building industry that you were right, and all homes should be designed by architects then given that architects design only about 3% of new homes in the US each year, then where will all these architects come from to design the rest of these 97% of homes?

Not only that, where will the money come from to pay the fees to design all these homes, which if designed by architects would what? Add 10-15% to the cost of the home for professional services?

I hear architects propose this idea all the time, with never a thought to these most elementary questions. And architects also seem completely unaware of how naive and even ignorant this make architects look, and contributes to it being unlikely that we ever design more than 3% of houses we work on now.

This discussion here has gone on for DAYs, and not one of you has even touched on this most basic question of such a proposal. While you bluster around with such foolish claims you ignore the fact that a small gain from 3% to something like 6% could make a giant difference to residential architects everywhere, and there are actually many things we can probably do about that. 

But you don't. Instead you bluster about all houses being designed by architects, you look foolish, and nothing improves. And I'm not even surprised that this would be case in an AIA interest group of "Custom" residential architects. I've called for a revision of this attitude here before, and it always meets with pushback. I'm sure this will be same.

-------------------------------------------
Gregory La Vardera
Architect
Gregory La Vardera Architect
Merchantville NJ
-------------------------------------------

You're missing the point of this particular discussion, Greg.  Which is: architects design homes Stronger than non-licensed people, to hopefully allow their homes to better withstand storms like Hurricane Sandy.  Having more architects design more homes  means that there should be less loss of life and property.  That's the subject of this thread. 

-------------------------------------------
Rand Soellner AIA
Architect/Owner/Principal
Home Architects
Cashiers NC
-------------------------------------------






Show Original Message -------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 11-02-2012 09:00
From: Gregory La Vardera
Subject: THIS is why only licensed architects should be designing homes

I've been following this discussion and I have one question for all of you:

If some how you managed to convince the rest of the home building industry that you were right, and all homes should be designed by architects then given that architects design only about 3% of new homes in the US each year, then where will all these architects come from to design the rest of these 97% of homes?

Not only that, where will the money come from to pay the fees to design all these homes, which if designed by architects would what? Add 10-15% to the cost of the home for professional services?

I hear architects propose this idea all the time, with never a thought to these most elementary questions. And architects also seem completely unaware of how naive and even ignorant this make architects look, and contributes to it being unlikely that we ever design more than 3% of houses we work on now.

This discussion here has gone on for DAYs, and not one of you has even touched on this most basic question of such a proposal. While you bluster around with such foolish claims you ignore the fact that a small gain from 3% to something like 6% could make a giant difference to residential architects everywhere, and there are actually many things we can probably do about that. 

But you don't. Instead you bluster about all houses being designed by architects, you look foolish, and nothing improves. And I'm not even surprised that this would be case in an AIA interest group of "Custom" residential architects. I've called for a revision of this attitude here before, and it always meets with pushback. I'm sure this will be same.

-------------------------------------------
Gregory La Vardera
Architect
Gregory La Vardera Architect
Merchantville NJ
-------------------------------------------

This comment is in response to both Rand from NC and Greg from NJ. First of all, I am suprised, Greg, that you seem to be in favor of non-licenced persons being able to design homes.  As you well know, here in NJ, only LICENCED ARCHITECTS  can design homes, which is a bonus for you and me both in this industry.  Your practice and mine includes a lot of renovation and new construction residential projects that in many states, can be done by a high school graduate CAD draftsman with a computer and business card, and builders who are willing to have them do their drawings regardless of their training and expertise.  I agree with the notion that only licenced professionals, especially architects, should be the only ones permitted to design buildings, regardless whether they are residential, commercial or what-ever.  It is a health, safety and welfare issue. 

However, I am not sure that Rand's comment regarding architects designing homes that are stronger is really valid, unless I am incorrect about laws in NC.  I have to assume that if a non-licenced person designs a home in NC, that at the very least, they require an engineer to design the structure, so the argument that architects homes are stronger may not be a valid one.  But maybe I am wrong....The advantage for us in NJ is that residential design for builders, developers....can't be just sealed by an engineer, but must be designed under an architect's licence first.  Only homeowners who literally "draw their own plans" can get away with having a home built without a seal, and must sign an oath, stating that they drew their own plans and take full responsibility for the design, and must meet all codes.   

-------------------------------------------
Thomas Wagner AIA
Thomas B. Wagner, Architect
Haddonfield NJ
-------------------------------------------






Show Original Message -------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 11-05-2012 08:03
From: Rand Soellner
Subject: THIS is why only licensed architects should be designing homes

You're missing the point of this particular discussion, Greg.  Which is: architects design homes Stronger than non-licensed people, to hopefully allow their homes to better withstand storms like Hurricane Sandy.  Having more architects design more homes  means that there should be less loss of life and property.  That's the subject of this thread. 

-------------------------------------------
Rand Soellner AIA
Architect/Owner/Principal
Home Architects
Cashiers NC
-------------------------------------------





-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 11-02-2012 09:00
From: Gregory La Vardera
Subject: THIS is why only licensed architects should be designing homes

I've been following this discussion and I have one question for all of you:

If some how you managed to convince the rest of the home building industry that you were right, and all homes should be designed by architects then given that architects design only about 3% of new homes in the US each year, then where will all these architects come from to design the rest of these 97% of homes?

Not only that, where will the money come from to pay the fees to design all these homes, which if designed by architects would what? Add 10-15% to the cost of the home for professional services?

I hear architects propose this idea all the time, with never a thought to these most elementary questions. And architects also seem completely unaware of how naive and even ignorant this make architects look, and contributes to it being unlikely that we ever design more than 3% of houses we work on now.

This discussion here has gone on for DAYs, and not one of you has even touched on this most basic question of such a proposal. While you bluster around with such foolish claims you ignore the fact that a small gain from 3% to something like 6% could make a giant difference to residential architects everywhere, and there are actually many things we can probably do about that. 

But you don't. Instead you bluster about all houses being designed by architects, you look foolish, and nothing improves. And I'm not even surprised that this would be case in an AIA interest group of "Custom" residential architects. I've called for a revision of this attitude here before, and it always meets with pushback. I'm sure this will be same.

-------------------------------------------
Gregory La Vardera
Architect
Gregory La Vardera Architect
Merchantville NJ
-------------------------------------------

My understanding is that in NY & NJ a structural engineer can stamp house plans and this was a hot topic of conversation on this site in which you could imagine what the belly aching was about. You're in a completely different environment with a high concentration of urban areas. NC & GA, not to mention most of the United States, are made up of rural areas where licensed Architects are hard to come by. 

The problem here is that we would all love to see a United States that required Architect's stamps on all buildings, but some of us recognize that we have a lot of work to do before this pipe dream can become a reality while others seem to live in a fantasy land where if you whine enough you can make changes with no idea of how it actually works on the ground.

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






Show Original Message -------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 11-06-2012 08:36
From: Thomas Wagner
Subject: THIS is why only licensed architects should be designing homes

This comment is in response to both Rand from NC and Greg from NJ. First of all, I am suprised, Greg, that you seem to be in favor of non-licenced persons being able to design homes.  As you well know, here in NJ, only LICENCED ARCHITECTS  can design homes, which is a bonus for you and me both in this industry.  Your practice and mine includes a lot of renovation and new construction residential projects that in many states, can be done by a high school graduate CAD draftsman with a computer and business card, and builders who are willing to have them do their drawings regardless of their training and expertise.  I agree with the notion that only licenced professionals, especially architects, should be the only ones permitted to design buildings, regardless whether they are residential, commercial or what-ever.  It is a health, safety and welfare issue. 

However, I am not sure that Rand's comment regarding architects designing homes that are stronger is really valid, unless I am incorrect about laws in NC.  I have to assume that if a non-licenced person designs a home in NC, that at the very least, they require an engineer to design the structure, so the argument that architects homes are stronger may not be a valid one.  But maybe I am wrong....The advantage for us in NJ is that residential design for builders, developers....can't be just sealed by an engineer, but must be designed under an architect's licence first.  Only homeowners who literally "draw their own plans" can get away with having a home built without a seal, and must sign an oath, stating that they drew their own plans and take full responsibility for the design, and must meet all codes.   

-------------------------------------------
Thomas Wagner AIA
Thomas B. Wagner, Architect
Haddonfield NJ
-------------------------------------------





-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 11-05-2012 08:03
From: Rand Soellner
Subject: THIS is why only licensed architects should be designing homes

You're missing the point of this particular discussion, Greg.  Which is: architects design homes Stronger than non-licensed people, to hopefully allow their homes to better withstand storms like Hurricane Sandy.  Having more architects design more homes  means that there should be less loss of life and property.  That's the subject of this thread. 

-------------------------------------------
Rand Soellner AIA
Architect/Owner/Principal
Home Architects
Cashiers NC
-------------------------------------------





-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 11-02-2012 09:00
From: Gregory La Vardera
Subject: THIS is why only licensed architects should be designing homes

I've been following this discussion and I have one question for all of you:

If some how you managed to convince the rest of the home building industry that you were right, and all homes should be designed by architects then given that architects design only about 3% of new homes in the US each year, then where will all these architects come from to design the rest of these 97% of homes?

Not only that, where will the money come from to pay the fees to design all these homes, which if designed by architects would what? Add 10-15% to the cost of the home for professional services?

I hear architects propose this idea all the time, with never a thought to these most elementary questions. And architects also seem completely unaware of how naive and even ignorant this make architects look, and contributes to it being unlikely that we ever design more than 3% of houses we work on now.

This discussion here has gone on for DAYs, and not one of you has even touched on this most basic question of such a proposal. While you bluster around with such foolish claims you ignore the fact that a small gain from 3% to something like 6% could make a giant difference to residential architects everywhere, and there are actually many things we can probably do about that. 

But you don't. Instead you bluster about all houses being designed by architects, you look foolish, and nothing improves. And I'm not even surprised that this would be case in an AIA interest group of "Custom" residential architects. I've called for a revision of this attitude here before, and it always meets with pushback. I'm sure this will be same.

-------------------------------------------
Gregory La Vardera
Architect
Gregory La Vardera Architect
Merchantville NJ
-------------------------------------------

Eric,

Only architects, not PE's. We are not New York.

And I don't think it's a pipedream, but rather a goal. AIA's policies should be aspirational, not cynical statements about the current state of affairs. We'll leave that to NCARB. I'd rather heed the advice of Stephen Covey and "Begin with the end in mind."

What's wrong with planning for a future when every state has the same high concentration of urban areas? Until the government decides to shut the doors to this country, that scenario is an inevitability. 

Finally, you don't have to live in a jurisdiction to be licensed there, so I really don't think architects would be hard to come by, if the work was there. NJ allows the use of "stock plans" as long as they were produced by an architect licensed in the state where the drawings were produced, and a NJ licensed architect reviews them for code conformance and fits the building to it's site.

I'm not even saying that every building will fit into my target market, but they will fit into somebody's marketing plan, given an even shot at it. And with a license on the line, a license that means making a living, the homeowner's best interested are protected; which is the essence of practice regulation, isn't it?
-------------------------------------------
David Del Vecchio AIA
Architect
David Del Vecchio, Architect, LLC
Cranford NJ
-------------------------------------------






Show Original Message -------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 11-07-2012 07:04
From: Eric Rawlings
Subject: THIS is why only licensed architects should be designing homes

My understanding is that in NY & NJ a structural engineer can stamp house plans and this was a hot topic of conversation on this site in which you could imagine what the belly aching was about. You're in a completely different environment with a high concentration of urban areas. NC & GA, not to mention most of the United States, are made up of rural areas where licensed Architects are hard to come by. 

The problem here is that we would all love to see a United States that required Architect's stamps on all buildings, but some of us recognize that we have a lot of work to do before this pipe dream can become a reality while others seem to live in a fantasy land where if you whine enough you can make changes with no idea of how it actually works on the ground.

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





-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 11-06-2012 08:36
From: Thomas Wagner
Subject: THIS is why only licensed architects should be designing homes

This comment is in response to both Rand from NC and Greg from NJ. First of all, I am suprised, Greg, that you seem to be in favor of non-licenced persons being able to design homes.  As you well know, here in NJ, only LICENCED ARCHITECTS  can design homes, which is a bonus for you and me both in this industry.  Your practice and mine includes a lot of renovation and new construction residential projects that in many states, can be done by a high school graduate CAD draftsman with a computer and business card, and builders who are willing to have them do their drawings regardless of their training and expertise.  I agree with the notion that only licenced professionals, especially architects, should be the only ones permitted to design buildings, regardless whether they are residential, commercial or what-ever.  It is a health, safety and welfare issue. 

However, I am not sure that Rand's comment regarding architects designing homes that are stronger is really valid, unless I am incorrect about laws in NC.  I have to assume that if a non-licenced person designs a home in NC, that at the very least, they require an engineer to design the structure, so the argument that architects homes are stronger may not be a valid one.  But maybe I am wrong....The advantage for us in NJ is that residential design for builders, developers....can't be just sealed by an engineer, but must be designed under an architect's licence first.  Only homeowners who literally "draw their own plans" can get away with having a home built without a seal, and must sign an oath, stating that they drew their own plans and take full responsibility for the design, and must meet all codes.   

-------------------------------------------
Thomas Wagner AIA
Thomas B. Wagner, Architect
Haddonfield NJ
-------------------------------------------





-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 11-05-2012 08:03
From: Rand Soellner
Subject: THIS is why only licensed architects should be designing homes

You're missing the point of this particular discussion, Greg.  Which is: architects design homes Stronger than non-licensed people, to hopefully allow their homes to better withstand storms like Hurricane Sandy.  Having more architects design more homes  means that there should be less loss of life and property.  That's the subject of this thread. 

-------------------------------------------
Rand Soellner AIA
Architect/Owner/Principal
Home Architects
Cashiers NC
-------------------------------------------





-------------------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 11-02-2012 09:00
From: Gregory La Vardera
Subject: THIS is why only licensed architects should be designing homes

I've been following this discussion and I have one question for all of you:

If some how you managed to convince the rest of the home building industry that you were right, and all homes should be designed by architects then given that architects design only about 3% of new homes in the US each year, then where will all these architects come from to design the rest of these 97% of homes?

Not only that, where will the money come from to pay the fees to design all these homes, which if designed by architects would what? Add 10-15% to the cost of the home for professional services?

I hear architects propose this idea all the time, with never a thought to these most elementary questions. And architects also seem completely unaware of how naive and even ignorant this make architects look, and contributes to it being unlikely that we ever design more than 3% of houses we work on now.

This discussion here has gone on for DAYs, and not one of you has even touched on this most basic question of such a proposal. While you bluster around with such foolish claims you ignore the fact that a small gain from 3% to something like 6% could make a giant difference to residential architects everywhere, and there are actually many things we can probably do about that. 

But you don't. Instead you bluster about all houses being designed by architects, you look foolish, and nothing improves. And I'm not even surprised that this would be case in an AIA interest group of "Custom" residential architects. I've called for a revision of this attitude here before, and it always meets with pushback. I'm sure this will be same.

-------------------------------------------
Gregory La Vardera
Architect
Gregory La Vardera Architect
Merchantville NJ
-------------------------------------------