Quantify, quantify - Letters: keep those cards, letters, and e-mails coming - Letter to the Editor

Residential Architect, March, 2003 by Richard Taylor

Even after 14 years in the residential architectural design business, I am surprised when the subject of architectural fees comes up. It is an ancient discussion, and one that never seems to reach any sort of resolution. Like Mr. Fania ("Letters," November-December 2002), I agree that our fee structure could stand a kick in the pants. But I also think that such a move might not achieve the desired result.

The fact is that those of us who value architectural design are clamoring for the same clients--the few who value what we do. When we're able to land those jobs, it's a great opportunity for us. It's a chance to use all of our skills and talent, and hopefully to be properly compensated for our time, experience, and knowledge.

But it is also a fact that the architectural profession abandoned long ago the arena of single-family home design for the middle class. That happened in part because the middle class has always been more interested in creating a nice place to live on their terms while we insisted on jamming "architecture" down their throats on ours.

That the void thus created was filled by builders is not a surprise--nor is the fact that homes built for the middle class often exhibit less "architecture" than we would like.

It is a simple matter of economics: What do architects bring to single-family design for the middle class that is of significant value to them? Until we can answer that question in a way that captures the imagination of the middle class and demonstrates the value of our input, most homeowners will continue to start the design process with the builder, and we will continue to find ourselves competing on the basis of fee more often than we would like.

Mr. Fania's admonishment is well-placed but unrealistic. If the cost of design services on the typical single-family home were to be raised to where we'd all like it to be, we'd simply be making it easier for many potential clients to decide not to use architects. Higher fees will not enlighten the public.

The most productive route to achieving a significant across-the-board raise for architects is for us to get involved in the process of developing and building. Architects must be the ones taking the financial risk, putting something new out there in the cornfields, rather than asking developers and builders to risk their businesses on our personal visions of what kind of housing the public should have access to. If we can prove with our own resources that better design sells, the parade of willing clients will form right behind us.

In the meantime, offering any form of better design in the existing delivery systems of the single-family home market is a step in the right direction. Residential architects may someday regard Don Gardner and Sarah Susanka as the pioneers who opened the door for the rest of us.

Richard Taylor, AIA

Richard Taylor Architects

Dublin, Ohio