VIEWPOINT




Residential Design By Architects...Or By Anyone?
by Nettie Bacle, AIA


Architecture is not a luxury. It
 is an essential part of mod-
em living and should be treated
as such. Recent damage to hous-
es in South Florida as a result of
Hurricane Andrew attest to the
fact that residential buildings are
not architecture at all, but are
the work of anyone wishing to
construct a building for human
habitation.
 We, as architects, should be
much more concerned with this
much-ignored segment of the
built environment. Why haven't
we been?
 One possible answer is that
in Florida "dwellings" for one
and two-family occupancy are
not legally considered architec-
ture and are not required by law
to be designed by a registered
architect. Only recently, and es-
pecially after Hurricane Elena in
1985, have coastal dwellings
been legally elevated to the sta-
tus of architecture. Since then,
by special legislation of the
State of Florida and by criteria
imposed by the Federal Emer-
gency Management Agency, the
construction of dwellings in
coastal areas, those outside the
Coastal Construction Control
Line (CCCL) and those exposed
to wind and flood, require con-
struction documents to be
signed by an architect or an en-
gineer. These critical areas are
rarely easily definable, are con-
stantly changing and their loca-
tions are a mystery to almost
everyone, including some of the
authorities who are supposed to
enforce the building code. First
of all, the CCCL is often shown
as a wavy unsurveyed line on
the plat maps. Also, many laws
relating to residential construc-
tion are ambiguous as to inter-
pretation and lax as to enforce-
ment. Architects and engineers
must spend an inordinate
amount of time trying to resolve
these ambiguities and potential
homeowners do not understand
why the process takes so long.
 In Florida, architects are not


employed for the design of most
dwellings and so there is no one
acting on behalf of the home-
owner to see that construction is
in accordance with building
codes and with the eccentrici-
ties of nature. The one excep-
tion might be a concerned build-
ing inspector. In some
jurisdictions, the only inspec-
tions required are for the septic
tank.
 Hurricanes are obviously not
the only threat to dwellings. So
are sinkholes, shifting sand, tor-
rential rain, floods and fire, al-
though most of these potential
perils are ignored in residential
design and construction that
does not utilize the services of
an architect. Architects are
trained to address these prob-
lems and their innovative solu-
tions add interest and individual-
ity to the homes that they
design.
 The mystery about hiring ar-
chitects to design homes is
shrouded in ignorance about
the services that architects per-
form, in the politics of neglect
and greed and in the time-hon-
ored notion that a man's home
is his castle and he will build it
as he pleases. Unfortunately,
this leaves homeowners with
shoddy construction and many
architects without work. It
seems to take a disaster to
prompt people to ask why build-
ings fall down and who's to
blame. Ironically, much of that
blame is targeted at architects.
 Using an architect does not
insure that a house will not fall
down, blow away or fall into a
sinkhole. What it does insure is
that careful attention has been
paid to building codes and local
conditions and that necessary
testing such as soil analysis will
be accomplished before con-
struction begins.
 The decision to require ar-
chitects to design dwellings is a
four-sided consideration involv-
ing the homeowner, the contrac-
tor, the building official and the


architect. Each entity has rea-
sons why the services of an ar-
chitect should or should not be
required. The dominant factors
include finances, aesthetics and
public safety and the importance
of each. Above everything else,
however, is the fact that every
house should be safe for human
habitation and suitable to its en-
vironment whether it's a tract
house, a custom-built home or a
prefabricated home.
 It must be stated that the
standard AIA agreement forms,
with either the architect or the
contractor, are written with jar-
gon that can be very confusing
to the layman. In addition, most
people are surprised to find
owner responsibilities included
in the contract, a fact which usu-
ally leads to the hiring of an at-
torney to review and explain the
document. An alternative form
of contract, a letter of agree-
ment, is usually drafted by the
architect during the pre-project
phase and he or she is rarely
compensated for the task.
 Contractors' attitudes vary
from those who would like to
see architects design everything
they build because it relieves
them of guesswork and prob-
lem-solving and those who think
an architect is merely a nui-
sance. In Florida, the one who
"pulls the permit" is responsible
for the construction and it may
cost the contractor more to do
the job when an architect insists
that all rules are closely fol-
lowed and craftsmanship is ex-
cellent.
 Confronted with a situation
in which the contractor tells the
homeowner that architects tend
to over-design everything, the
best solution might be to ask
the homeowner to transfer the
structural and engineering de-
sign contracts to the contractor
and let his engineers sign off on
that part of the work. This re-
moves both fees and responsi-
bilities from the architect and if
the engineer and contractor are


reasonable people, they usually
try to follow the architect's con-
ceptual design and even assist
in locating materials and work-
ing out construction details in
the field. When an architect is
not hired for the bidding and
construction phases of the pro-
ject, a trustworthy contractor is
an asset to the architect because
of their mutual interest in pleas-
ing the homeowner and comply-
ing with codes. Experienced
contractors are well aware of the
services an architect performs
and they seem to appreciate the
expertise they bring to the pro-
ject.
 While most public authori-
ties appreciate the efforts which
architects make on behalf of
guarding the public safety, their
politics often disagree when it
comes to hiring architects to de-
sign residences. The disagree-
ment seems to stem from the
fact that they feel it is one more
expense that has to be borne by
the homeowner and might pre-
vent the construction of an oth-
erwise affordable home. Howev-
er, in the aftermath of a tragedy
like Hurricane Andrew, these
same authorities seem to be-
lieve that the expertise of an ar-
chitect or an engineer should be
required for residential design.
Abundant opportunities for infe-
rior work exist in many places
where there is not a qualified
building official to perform thor-
ough building inspections.
Where no such person exists,
the homeowner is left with the
responsibility for monitoring
construction.
 While residential design
might be very rewarding to a
number of architects, it seems
that most of Florida's housing
design is in high risk locations
that are subject to severe storm
damage. The cost of liability in-
surance can be prohibitive, the
reliability of insurers can be
questionable and homeowners
do not want to pay for this insur-
ance if it is outside the normal

 FLORIDA ARCHITECT February 1992