And the point is....?

They have a certain je ne sais quoi don't you think?

Yeah, I get it. Some apprentice named... Right...or Wright... or something like that did this silly design. Can you imagine...hanging out over a bunch of water and stuff...so much water and mist...whatta silly guy!

Really Virgil who'd want something like what you posted when you could have those lovely snout garage houses that Worthy posted.

Falling Water Falling Down.

No doubt, given unlimited budgets and acres to play with, iconic architects can shine. So good on the eyes, so heavy on the pocketbook.

Are they designed by your Canadian architectural technologists?

Do I really need to post Frankie G's launching pad home design again?

My point is that even modest homes on small lots can be designed so much better given some professional design input--which seems here to be completely absent--than what we often see.

In the example above, front garages were a given as there are no rear lanes. But the giant gables, the ski slope garage roof, the windows squeezed to the interior of the facades...

***

BTW here's a cantilever that works.

To answer the question: Do builders hire architects? Yes, some do. We've employed a licensed architect on staff for the past 16 years. We've also employed three architecture students (summer interns) in our office, too.

Our architect is a key member of our design/build team; we believe that our design competency is a differentiating capability from other companies in our local market. However, many consumers don't know the difference between an architect and an architectural draftsperson. Some will purchase a $50 CAD program at a big box store thinking the sum total of an architect's knowledge is captured in the box so they don't need one to design their home.

The photo posted by Worthy is also a good illustration of the need for architectural covenants, and for plan review and approval prior to construction.

I'm all for employing architects state registration laws can sometimes get in the way.

In the dozen states where I have practiced as a principal or employee, an employee can't stamp a drawing for a firm. To do that he/she must be a principal of the firm and in some states a majority of firm's principals must also be registered so it qualifies as an architectural firm. The usual way around these rules is to form a joint venture or similar arrangement where the architect can be responsible for his/her work and insured for it.

Of course, one and two family house design documents aren't normally required to be stamped so it is possible in many states for an architect to provide those design services as an employee and not stamp anything but thetas not possible for multi-family or commercial buildings.

But then there is the fuzzy issue of a firm offering "architect" designed homes or "architectural design" services which is a violation of most state registration laws if the firm doesn't meet the state requirements for an architectural firm.

These technicalities don't much matter to builders and homeowners but if you are the architect involved, it is wise to stay on the right side of the state registration laws in order to keep your license.

Yes. I've always worked with a number of builders. Charles Ross Homes being one as they've contacted me from time to time to supplement their in house talent. And yes, there are quality, design oriented builders out there doing well in a profit oriented environment.

Here's a project going up now, waterfront townhouses in Solomons Island, MD. where we're going off the old coastal life saving station forms like this:

@JDS, I made the point that most consumers don't know the difference between an "architect" and an "architectural draftsperson." Using the term "licensed" in conjunction with the title "architect" is one way we promote the difference. You could substitute the term "registered" for licensed, but it carries a different weight.

With regard to sealing plans, my understanding is that VA requires design professionals to seal plans they produce. The requirement that a company have an architect as a principal applies to companies with the term "architects" in the company name and where they are selling architect services. Might be different in MA, most things are.

In the states where I have practiced, the name of the firm is only one criteria. No company or individual can use the terms "architect" or "architectural" orally or in writing when offering to provide or providing design services unless at least one owner is an architect in the state because using those terms is considered the practice of architecture. Enforcement in MA is a fine but rarely imposed since the registration board is made up of volunteers with no enforcement staff so they only discipline architects. But in CT violations are considered consumer fraud, aggressively enforced and all owners of a firm must be licensed.

In regions where the title "architect" is effectively protected, it is unnecessary to clarify that an architect is licensed or registered. But in some regions enforcement is so lax that I believe most AIA members pay the dues just to be able to show they are licensed even though RA means the same thing.

My son hired a design-build firm in CO. He and his wife kept referring to the project manager as the "architect" but there were just too many amateurish mistakes. I looked him up online and found he had an undergraduate degree in environmental design and referred to his profession as "architect" on other websites. This is what state laws are intended to prohibit but it is still a common occurrence.

@worthy. Love your question. Can I send you a pm,? Thank you

"...Here's a cantilever that works...!"

And here's what happens when you left those wonderful drawings and specs out at night and didn't put them away in the drawer...

To send and receive messages both parties must enable "messages" on their home pages.