Custom Residential Architects Network

Dave - Perhaps you can articulate what you at CRAN have accomplished.  My purpose here is not to slam the AIA.  I think the AIA has and continues to be a good advocate for the large commercial firm. I met some wonderful people during the years I served - which is a benefit in of itself. 

Perhaps you can provide the sole practitioner, or smaller firm that has a residential concentration some reasons to remain an AIA member or even join.   I maintain that less than 50% of US architects are members.  I speculate that the majority of non-members are residential practitioners.   

 We have some real problems in our profession and architectural education system.  For one, there is a one-size-fits-all degree/license that trains all architects to be general practitioners - lead designers at that.  The reality is...very few practice this way.  It seems as AIA treats its membership the same, failing to recognize the disparity between the sole practitioner (who typically has to rely on his/her spouse to be the bread winner) and the corporate principle.   When coupled with the exorbitant dues of NCARB, LEED, etc. it is hard to justify the ROI for a sole practitioner.  Why can't AIA recognize this and try to capture that sector?  What if there were a sliding dues structure?  (not a tax on large firms).  but, what would be lost if there was a membership as low as $200.00 for sole practioners.  If the AIA could dempnstrate some value for this, they might pick up 35,000 members!  Or, should there be a separate organization, that works cooperatively with the AIA to meet the needs of the small practitioner? 

My final quetion is....why are the efforts just beginning to happen?  Many, like myself, feeel it is too little, too late and, unless i can percieve some real value now, I am not illing to wait it out a generation for things to gradually change. 

Dave - Perhaps you can articulate what you at CRAN have accomplished.  My purpose here is not to slam the AIA.  I think the AIA has and continues to be a good advocate for the large commercial firm. I met some wonderful people during the years I served - which is a benefit in of itself. 

Perhaps you can provide the sole practitioner, or smaller firm that has a residential concentration some reasons to remain an AIA member or even join.   I maintain that less than 50% of US architects are members.  I speculate that the majority of non-members are residential practitioners.   

 We have some real problems in our profession and architectural education system.  For one, there is a one-size-fits-all degree/license that trains all architects to be general practitioners - lead designers at that.  The reality is...very few practice this way.  It seems as AIA treats its membership the same, failing to recognize the disparity between the sole practitioner (who typically has to rely on his/her spouse to be the bread winner) and the corporate principle.   When coupled with the exorbitant dues of NCARB, LEED, etc. it is hard to justify the ROI for a sole practitioner.  Why can't AIA recognize this and try to capture that sector?  What if there were a sliding dues structure?  (not a tax on large firms).  but, what would be lost if there was a membership as low as $200.00 for sole practioners.  If the AIA could dempnstrate some value for this, they might pick up 35,000 members!  Or, should there be a separate organization, that works cooperatively with the AIA to meet the needs of the small practitioner? 

My final quetion is....why are the efforts just beginning to happen?  Many, like myself, feeel it is too little, too late and, unless i can percieve some real value now, I am not illing to wait it out a generation for things to gradually change. 

Dave - Perhaps you can articulate what you at CRAN have accomplished.  My purpose here is not to slam the AIA.  I think the AIA has and continues to be a good advocate for the large commercial firm. I met some wonderful people during the years I served - which is a benefit in of itself. 

Perhaps you can provide the sole practitioner, or smaller firm that has a residential concentration some reasons to remain an AIA member or even join.   I maintain that less than 50% of US architects are members.  I speculate that the majority of non-members are residential practitioners.   

 We have some real problems in our profession and architectural education system.  For one, there is a one-size-fits-all degree/license that trains all architects to be general practitioners - lead designers at that.  The reality is...very few practice this way.  It seems as AIA treats its membership the same, failing to recognize the disparity between the sole practitioner (who typically has to rely on his/her spouse to be the bread winner) and the corporate principle.   When coupled with the exorbitant dues of NCARB, LEED, etc. it is hard to justify the ROI for a sole practitioner.  Why can't AIA recognize this and try to capture that sector?  What if there were a sliding dues structure?  (not a tax on large firms).  but, what would be lost if there was a membership as low as $200.00 for sole practioners.  If the AIA could dempnstrate some value for this, they might pick up 35,000 members!  Or, should there be a separate organization, that works cooperatively with the AIA to meet the needs of the small practitioner? 

My final quetion is....why are the efforts just beginning to happen?  Many, like myself, feeel it is too little, too late and, unless i can percieve some real value now, I am not illing to wait it out a generation for things to gradually change. 

Dave - Perhaps you can articulate what you at CRAN have accomplished.  My purpose here is not to slam the AIA.  I think the AIA has and continues to be a good advocate for the large commercial firm. I met some wonderful people during the years I served - which is a benefit in of itself. 

Perhaps you can provide the sole practitioner, or smaller firm that has a residential concentration some reasons to remain an AIA member or even join.   I maintain that less than 50% of US architects are members.  I speculate that the majority of non-members are residential practitioners.   

 We have some real problems in our profession and architectural education system.  For one, there is a one-size-fits-all degree/license that trains all architects to be general practitioners - lead designers at that.  The reality is...very few practice this way.  It seems as AIA treats its membership the same, failing to recognize the disparity between the sole practitioner (who typically has to rely on his/her spouse to be the bread winner) and the corporate principle.   When coupled with the exorbitant dues of NCARB, LEED, etc. it is hard to justify the ROI for a sole practitioner.  Why can't AIA recognize this and try to capture that sector?  What if there were a sliding dues structure?  (not a tax on large firms).  but, what would be lost if there was a membership as low as $200.00 for sole practioners.  If the AIA could dempnstrate some value for this, they might pick up 35,000 members!  Or, should there be a separate organization, that works cooperatively with the AIA to meet the needs of the small practitioner? 

My final quetion is....why are the efforts just beginning to happen?  Many, like myself, feeel it is too little, too late and, unless i can percieve some real value now, I am not illing to wait it out a generation for things to gradually change. 

Rand - I'm with you on this. 

 After some 20 years of bine an AIA member, including two terms on my chapter's board of directors, chairing three committees (scholarship, Education, Design Awards) and serving an a variety of other roles, I have come to the conclusion that the dues  do not have an ROI for residential architects.  Simply pu, the AIA does not "get" residential architecture.  This is evident from their promotional materials (btw there is a video on using an architect for a house, and true to AIA form it shows someone building an expensive, one-off, Eurobox, that claims to be "green" while located on a remote site.) , contracts, publications, and awards programs.  They just don't get it, and I don't think they ever will!  They are out of touch with residential practice.  Period!

 My question is.... Instead of forming a new group, why can't CORA take this over?  I would gladly pay a reasonable amount for dues to an organization that (as Dave A. has pointed out) celebrates the process of working with an architect instead of heroic individuals and iconic objects.

CORA was founded by residential architects who were disgusted with the AIA and it's publication.  I don't know why they feel they need to be partnering with CRAN.  The fact is, the majority of licensed architects (aprox. 52%) are not AIA members.  I'd be willing to guess the majority of non-members are involved in residential practices. 

 We need someone to advocate for us.  Here are some of the top issues:

 + Regulating single family design (this will have to be done in cooperation with NAHB and will likely sprout a second tier of licensure).  But, its time has come.

 + Advocation for form-based zoning codes.

 + Advocation of sustainability using common sense principles (see S. Mouzan "Original Green") in lieu of high performance (i.e. LEED) buildings that ignore urban issues and common esthetic principles.  Let's communicate to the public that sprawl is bad for them

 + Contracts for residential architects.  (at two AIA conferences I was told by two different attorney/architects to not use AIA small project contracts, instead use B141, etc.  These guys had obviously never worked with residential clients and builders before - and I could see my projects going up 15% by introducing those contracts, let alone being laughed out of a meeting by any intelligent residential contractor)

 + Process documentation that articulates what is necessary in residential CD's and design serives at different levels.

 These are but a few.  But, my big question goes out to the leadership at CORA? 

 Why are you continuing to affiliate with the AIA?  They continue to let the majority of residential practitioners down.

 Why are you inclusive of non-licensed designers, legitimizing their practices?

 Why not become a dues supporting professional organization for licensed design professionals engaged in residential practice? 

My question to AIA members with dedicated residential practies is:  Why do you continue to put up with this?