The Congress of Residential Architecture

Here is my own vision of what is needed for the 21st century.

An organization which accepts all
uses democracy and established procedure
establishes qualifications on an individual basis
is free or very inexpensive
is online and easily accessible

What we don't need is: an actual building located in D.C., a quarterly publication, a PR campaign, lobbyists, more government regulation.

We have to start with the reality that (in most areas) anyone can design a house. There is nothing wrong with trying to establish legislation to change the current situation but I don't see that as likely to happen anytime soon and when it does happen it will be a slow process.

I like organizations such as Boy/Girl Scouts of America as pretty good models. Where individuals progress by acquiring and demonstrating skills.



I don't like the AIA because they do not serve my type. AIBD provides a similar function but they charge more than they are actually worth (for me) and they are not keeping up with the modern communications technology. I also think that their base qualifications are somewhat empty.

where, where... is Palladio and ... and... Frank Gehry's images on the logo??

I am afraid Gehry is not going to make it on the seal

Palladio maybe worthy but there is only so much room and I feel that the Vitruvius reference represents antiquity and tradition. Jefferson represents the independent spirit and also tradition, Wright the most famous American architect who also did not graduate high school and modern design.

Chris, that is CORA! Can you feel the love! I am serious.

You aren't to get the draftspeople and architects any closer than that... or certainly me.

Peace!

David

I have never fully understood what CORA is but ASRD is my vision of what it should be.

Here is the Facebook page:
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?ref ... 420&ref=mf

Aside from the fact that FLW just turned over in his grave... I wouldn't be suprised if you get a call from Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation's team of attorneys. Beware, (and I am not an attorney to know) I have heard they are pretty ruthless in controlling his name, copyrights, etc. I would assume the same exist for Jerfferson, though I am not sure.

Good luck with that!

Seriously though, no architect I know is going to proudly leave the AIA to join a group of designers. Why not join the the Nursury School Graduates for Residential Design. Sorry, CORA is a wonderful group of anyone interested in improving residential design... n e x t....

I don't mean to burst your bubble Chris...but that group already exists, with an office in D.C. and everything...


www.aibd.org

I agree, for that matter most of them will not come to CORA either. I don't really care one way or the other. Architects have a couple of choices already and they are for the most part well trained. There are some who are not elitists. There is one over in my CAD program forum who just started a mentorship program to train anyone to run the program.

I do think that it is an unfortunate situation that people legally engaged in residential design have been kept separated from architecture. This is probably why they don't tend to care about it as much as we would like. Why try to be a part of a group that does not want you? This is probably why that four years later there is still pretty much the same half dozen people here. There is no opportunity for advancement. CORA is a wonderful group if you are an architect, I will always be a second class citizen here unless I spend 30k and ten years to become an architect and that just isn't going to happen. I guess my attitude is that if an architects idea to improve residential design is to stomp out residential designers than I don't need them.

I simply believe that given the opportunity people want to do the right thing. They want to improve their skills and be better than their competition. Just because they did not take the architect sanctioned path does not make them hopeless.


Joey, of coarse I know the AIBD exists.
I don't need an office in D.C. I also do not need a quarterly publication, paid staff, lobbyist, advertising, etc.. I would have been happy to join the AIBD but at $660.00 per year I find the cost to be higher than the value to me. Over twenty years that represents a significant addition to my retirement account. They also have been slow to get online. Just to fill in the paperwork to join is a pain. So I send them three letters of reference, what does that prove? Are they actually checking these references or are they simply filing them? I think the AIBD could use some competition.

Chris,

We are all equal here at CORA. We are trying to improve residential design at any level. The fact that you used commodity firmness and delight on your new logo is enough for me to feel great about why we are here. That said, you are correct that as an architect, I don't want a high school level drafts-person with the same public designation as me. I worked too hard for it. I am kind surprised you don't understand this.

You are correct that CORA is not going to change the world in its current state, but I do think that ideas have been incubated with these walls that might make a difference some day.

Peace

Dave

I believe that each persons designation should be established by demonstrating skills and earning certifications.

To that end I am trying to incorporate a ranking system. What I call the Nine Levels of Achievement.

This is a way to recognize all types of achievement and not just whether or not one has passed the ARE. This may seem a bit campy but I hope that it will promote advancement. Perhaps someone who has achieved a certain level would then be designated as a Master. This is something like an apprenticeship system. I don't expect to have your rank.

Each person will have an individual seal which will reflect their achievement in the system.
I added two more membership designations: Master and Architect (only registered architects can use the Architect designation)

There are more things which would earn achievement levels (this was just a first draft) but I have already thought of others such as running a company, historic preservation, etc..

"You are correct that CORA is not going to change the world in its current state, but I do think that ideas have been incubated with these walls that might make a difference some day."

If the idea is to require all homes to be designed by architects that one has been around for at least 75 years. If the idea is for architects to have a positive influence on residential designers through interaction I don't see that happening here.

In my opinion what is needed is not just another organization and calls for greater regulation but a new system. Where individuals are evaluated on merit and performance and which has very high goals.

"That said, you are correct that as an architect, I don't want a high school level drafts-person with the same public designation as me. I worked too hard for it. I am kind surprised you don't understand this."

You will always have the designation of licensed architect that no one who has not meet those requirements will have.

..but I think it is natural for people who come out of the current system of architectural training to put a great deal of value on it's worth. The fact is that there is more than one way to accomplish any goal and learning is no different. We currently have in place a system of licensing for different types of building I do not see those standards being changed any time soon.

As far as I can tell in your system you want architects to have all the control. In my system an architect is the same as anyone else except that they are licensed by the state to design certain types of buildings. That does not mean that any architect here is not a better home designer than I am. Just that we are all legally entitled to design a house in most locations. This fact in itself puts us on an even footing regardless of how we may feel about it. From that point the free market decides who is best and design ability is not the only factor.

I believe the AIA is mostly to blame for the current state of architecture. By establishing a policy of exclusion rather than inclusion they have set themselves at odds with residential design. This is the reason you don't like them and it is the reason why the AIBD now exists. If they had not pursued such a stupid policy by now we might have actually have some higher standards for residential design.

Chris, while applaud your efforts to try to define an organization in an image which best fits with your personal views, I don't think the effort is placed properly.

The back of a membership flier used by our local builder's association (LVBA) has a quote from Theodore Roosevelt that seems apropos here. " Every man owes a part of his time and money to the business or industry in which he is engaged. No man has the moral right to withhold his support from an organization that is striving to improve conditions within his sphere."

While I can understand the resistance to the AIA by architects who engage in residential design on the basis that the organization doesn't really address "conditions within his sphere", I can't agree with your attitude about the AIBD. This is a group who supports exactly what you do.

There is thread running now on the AIBD forum about what the organization offers its members. Jim Wright's comments rang true with me, where he said that this is a group who truly "gets it." We are your peers, and each of us sees the value of a national organization to create a framework to accomplish the variety of goals which are important to us and our careers. $400. to $600. is a pittance compared to the value received in terms of information support, representation to a variety of agencies, governmental and private sector, national conventions, local society meetings, discounts from corporate partners, information and aid on copyright issues, liability insurance packages, and all the benefits of interacting with a group of your peers. I don't know what in the world of home design could give you a better value. As I've said previously, just friggin put the plans and recs together and join in the fun.

By the way, AIBD has been working on a master residential designer designation which addresses some of the goals and mastery issues you are talking about. Jim Lucia was the father of this, and as it progresses I'm sure will add an additional luster to AIBD membership.

We have not seen any posts from James here lately -I hope he is well.

Well I agree that everyone should be active in their chosen profession but at the same time I think that there is room for more than one. Architects have AIA and SARA and CORA could also develop into a full fledged organization.

If the ASRD provides a place for designers who, for what ever reason, are not in the AIBD than I see that as a plus. The key to legislative power is members and money. Having a free organization at least has a potential to expand the member group.

In general I think competition is good. Currently the only competition that the AIBD has is nothing. I am sure that I am prejudice but I think I have some good ideas as to how an organization should operate and if nothing else ASRD allows me to demonstrate those ideas.

Here is my latest ASRD seal structure:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2 ... 420&ref=mf


I have attempted to emphasize education without excluding practical experience and demonstrated competence.

I'm thinkin'? What about American Society of Building Designers (well some of us work in both residential & light commercial which extends beyond just single-family residences.). I do find the chevrons / stars system an interesting quantification system. How it works would be interesting. How does one demonstrate to the society?

A small things, is all the seals left of the one for Advance type -> semicircular or a full circular seal?

In Vitruvian terms going back to Latin -

Utilitus, Venustus, Firmitus

Utility, Beauty, Firmness (of course, there are multiple translation for Utility/Commodity and Firmness also is Strength)

This is a core element of my design philosophy that defines Function.

"Form follows Function and Context". Utility, Beauty and Firmness defines Function in the 3 dimensions of Function.
Then there is Context.

So for historic context, maybe the latin words used by Vitruvian would be best fitting.