My Children's Education

Another barely architectural post wherein I ruminate on elementary education models. Here in rural Vermont we have to make choices about how and where we educate our children just like anywhere else. There are the public schools, private schools and home schooling. There are special challenges that we face that may surprise some of you. We have no worries about our own children's abilities in reading writing and arithmetic. This year at our local public elementary, transportation is an issue. We will have to drive our daughter 9 miles to school over mostly dirt roads and then pick her up after school. Class size is also an issue – she will only have three classmates. My daughter is entering kindergarten this year after spending a few years in pre-K at Neighborhood Schoolhouse. Neighborhood is a great school without any particular “dogma” that we found at other early education centers such as Montessori and Waldorf. Neighborhood actually goes up to grade 6 but we preferred not to keep her there through 6th grade or reasons I shall touch on below.

Last year I realized that I knew very little about how school is currently taught and what the different models and options where so I began a process of self-education. I quickly learned about the good and bad aspects of modern education. I finally learned what “teaching to the test” means. There is a bit too much of this at the school she will attend starting tomorrow (our local public school) but I expect it will be tempered with the fact that she will have only three other classmates and therefore her individual needs will not be ignored. I also think a bit of this rigor might do her some good. I have become a big fan of integrated and project based learning and I hope to send our own kids to schools where these are the prevalent learning methods. Edutopia is a great resource for information on this and I am a big fan of “the World in Claire's Classroom” a film about a local school. (Everyone with kids should see this)

I can look back on my own architecture school education as a model of how project based learning works. A very important aspect of architecture school was having 50 classmates all working on similar projects and grappling with similar issues individually and in groups. It would have been a very different education if there where only 6 of us. This was the main reason I dropped out of the art program at my first college. My own elementary education followed a more traditional model where we learned math out of a textbook, did worksheets, wrote research papers and book reports etc. It didn't work very well for me (I had an amazing ability to completely forget everything I learned over the summer) and I expect it won't work very well for my daughter either. Project based learning applies a method of learning more similar to architecture school to grade school education and seems difficult to incorporate into lesson plans for small classes with limited community involvement.

Which brings me to an issue which is important to us – class size. Locally, The Grammar School in Putney is a great example of a school that incorporates project based learning, has excellent teachers who are all on the same page with regards to learning methods, has adequate class size and has a huge variety of resources outside the classroom to call upon – involvement with the local community and the “real world” are important aspects of project based learning. We hope to send our kids there in the future – when we can afford to. Neighborhood Schoolhouse incorporates project based learning but really suffers from inadequate class size and resources once kids get beyond kindergarten and first grade. However, Brattleboro is a great place to raise community minded kids no matter what school they attend. There is a tremendous array of opportunity in music, theater and circus arts, sports and other activities to engage in outside of school. My daughters attended her first Sweetback Sisters concert when she was only a few months old and we get her to as many concerts and museums and so forth as we can.

Note to Do-it-yourselfers

The following is from a note I just sent off in an email and I thought it might be appropriate for the blog. In terms of budget and simplicity which go hand in hand I recommend one of two methods. If you have time and some good solid professional framing experience I recommend double wall stud frame construction. Otherwise I recommend a SIP shell. SIP's start to get expensive when you add a real timber frame and lots of jigs and jogs and dormers. Another consideration is to minimize working on a ladder, especially on an uneven site. Ladder/staging work adds time and $$ (and danger). So either keep roof work super simple and easily hired out or keep the roof low or wrap a porch roof around that you can use as staging to work on the roof. A simple rectangle with a double pitched roof can be made amazingly elegant and fun through detailing, proportion and windows. The SIP shell kills several birds with one stone (must think of better analogy) but I have seen some very messy SIP craftsman ship by big players in the SIP industry so you have to be careful. Mismatched joints that telescope through the shingles on the roof or make it difficult to sheetrock over are common as are un-foamed gaps where you can see light through. So careful oversight is important. With a Structural SIP shell you can get fancy with local hemlock lumber to support and upstairs which can have a very warm industrial/agricultural/modern look to it. I often seem to do houses for do-it-yourselfers and there is definitely some good inexpensive forgiving detailing that can be used. Above all, use methods of construction and detailing that are common and easily understood as well as hard to screw up.

My History

since high school for anyone interestedI thought I'd write down a bit about my life since high school (over 26 years now) (!) in a very abbreviated form. After high school I spent a year at Bridgeton Academy, a post graduate prep school, taking college level courses simply because I didn't do very well in high school and wasn't ready to figure out college yet. I then spent a year at Castleton State College in Vermont where I studied art and business with an eye toward a dual degree. That was a fun year and I spent a lot of time skiing on the nordic team but I found the art program lacking in rigor. I then got a summer job at a civil engineering firm in Portland, ME which turned into a 15 month gig. Then I applied to architecture school. (what I had wanted to do all along but never thought I could get in) There wasn't much to choose from in terms of architecture schools back then for a poor kid from rural Maine. I went to the architecture school at Roger Williams University and found the rigor and intensity that I had been looking for. I did very well and graduated from Roger Williams with a Bachelor of Architecture 5 year professional degree (BArch) 8 years after high school. After all that time in school, I graduated with considerable debt in the form of credit cards and student loans. Which meant no Europe for me - I had to get a job and fast. I had sent out a million resumes and had an interview at a small firm in Brattleboro, Vermont before I actually graduated. I immediately fell in love with Brattleboro and packed up my van the day after graduation, came to Vermont and lived in a campground until I found a small apartment. I worked at the Brattleboro firm for a year and realized that I really needed to build for a while to better understand how to be an architect. This led to the next 6 years or so working for a small building firm designing and building several new houses and a myriad of smaller projects. I tell people that this was my version of graduate school. Periodically, I took time to work for other architecture firms, pecking away at the internship required before sitting for all the exams necessary to become an architect. Demand for my design skills led to full time work before I had my license and over the past decade I have been mostly self-employed doing design work and occasional general contracting. Much of my work comes from local builders with whom I've worked in the past and much comes from my internet presence including this blog. Although I sometimes regret not heading into Boston or New York, wearing only black clothing and small rectangly glasses and working for a hip and cool firm before heading north into Vermont, I am mostly satisfied with my choice.

Styles

I have been thinking a lot about traditional vs. modern home design. These terms are gross oversimplifications and this is the categorization of style issues I like to complain about. In the eyes of the populace it seems that modern still connotes white boxy houses with flat leaky roofs. Traditional has become a bastardized cheapened re-interpretation of the older houses found in the neighborhood. Architects working in the modern style used to be “out of touch”, overly intellectual”, “never swung a hammer”. Few are that anymore. Builders used to be scholars of the vernacular and learned the rules of convention and proportion in addition to construction . That mostly went out the window decades ago. Speaking abstractly, when I look at a pleasing-to-the-eye older house in Brattleboro, say a two family Greek Revival, I see an interplay of proportion, traditional details and an overall set of rules. A successful modern building would not try to copy this but instead perhaps be more true to available building materials and methods and not try to engage in historical fakery.

A successful modern building would still need to play by a set of rules even if those rules have been updated considerably in the last 100 years. Although some of the more mathematical rules such as the golden section seem to stand outside the progression of time and are perhaps more to be thought of as universal truths.

Think Music

In music there are definite rules that nearly all styles play by; scales, rhythms and harmonics to name a few. In the past, music styles have been greatly segregated. In modern times the separating walls have eroded. Musicians now draw on a wide variety of influences and new music is increasingly hard to categorize according to style. The internet has accelerated this phenomenon greatly and the music world is experiencing an artistic renaissance. The world of residential architectural design is as well although at a slower pace. The average 35 year old new home buyer has probably been exposed to modern design much more than a generation ago. The house that their parents wanted in House and Garden magazine is not necessarily what the younger generation, who are more likely to peruse design focused websites on the internet or subscribe to Dwell, want anymore simply because they have seen the alternatives. Although developers and the banks seem a bit slow to recognize this there are exceptions.

Like any good musician, an architect must continually practice the fundamentals. In my case that means studying and working within the successful local vernacular and try to do it in a scholarly way without being too anachronistic. And occasionally I am given license to fly!

Building Science II - FaceBook conversation

What follows is a discussion from Bluetime Collaborative's Facebook page. For those of you who don't know, Bluetime is Vermont Architect. It represents the increasingly collaborative nature of running a small architecture business.

Bluetime Collaborative: I just attended a mini seminar at Building Green with Peter Yost on wall and roof systems - moisture management. something of a recap for me but what I think about are how many architects and builders are still doing things the way they were 10 or 20 years ago.

Bluetime Collaborative: I think what I got out of it was that we need to think more in terms of systems rather than simply products. There is a huge amount of information and discussion out there that most builders and architects are ignoring at their own peril.

Bluetime Collaborative: Remember building is a science, codes represent bare minimums and are always ten years behind the science, r-value is but a small part of a system

Dave: Bob, what is their wall/roof system recommendation?

Bluetime Collaborative: it boils down to air and moisture management and dealing with them as separate issues. ideal systems may differ from practical systems. (what would you do on your own house -vs-what would you design for someone else to build. Always know where your dew point will be to prevent failures. (LOTS of failures in the northeast in recent years) walls need to dry to the inside and outside. Air condiitoning introduces a whole new set of parameters. Boston based Building Science Corp is a good place to start. Insulation is what you add when everything else is done right. Systems management means there are tons of great and products out there and tons of hype, but little knowledge of how to put them all together as a system to minimize risk. Have a lawyer design your details ;-) they will research the science and design no minimize risk. Or design like a lawyer...

Dave: What's the current though on closed-cell foam? I like what it does for creating a very tight envelope but question what happens when water works its way into the wall. Open cell scares me - I have seen it blacken with mold because of infiltration at a roof.

Bluetime Collaborative : worth further investigation I would check greenbuildingadvisor.com - I have been lucky to never have used open cell. I hear it isn't great. I have used closed cell in a flash and batt situation often. It works very well with my double stud wall system and has lots of advantages. The key seems to be to flash thick enough so the dew point doesn't happen at the sheathing and look at the overall wall in terms of how it can dry out. (always assume things will get wet) For instance; vinyl wallpaper doesn't allow for drying to the inside.

Dave : Fine Homebuilding just had an article on the flash and batt approach. I was apprehensive when I read it thinking it would only be marginally more to fully spray the walls. I'm hoping to do closed cell on our house but it will come down to a budget decision.

Bluetime Collaborative: Flash and batt is usually cheaper enough to make the decision clear. A timing advantage in the fall is that you can flash, then all the subs do their thing in a warm heatable environment then fill in right before sheetrock. Probably the best performing system involves 2" of rigid outside (depending on where you live) with cellulose inside but detailing is tough - learning curve. Window manuf. are now adding exterior jamb extensions to their options.

Dave: I've seen that exterior insulation detail in Building Science Corp's books but have never done it before. Flash and cellulose is an interesting combination.

Matt : Bob, which window manufacturers? Thermotec? Also, this is a killer blog entry. I'm not buying flash & batt at all, especially with less than 2" flash coats; flash & pack ... maybe... better continuity, fewer gaps, between the lumpy foam and the cellulose than batts. I can't agree more on the theme of systems over products. I do construction estimating for a building supply company. I see 8-10 plans a week. The scariest thing I see right now is a la cart use of new products without regard to the system.

Matt: Actual construction document examples: taped 1" XPS over taped ZipWall with 5" cavity OPEN CELL, continuous Grace Ice & Water shield over closed-cell rafter bay insulation (Grace has even published a report advising against this), and 9" rafter bay closed-cell under a flat roof (mostly egregious because there are a dozen known more practical ways to deal with that).

Bluetime Collaborative: yikes!

Bluetime Collaborative: I should clarify and perhaps my terminology is wrong. By "Batt" I do mean a blown in dense pack cellulose or even fiberglass not batts. Does anybody use those anymore? (sarcasm)

Bluetime Collaborative: When I look back over the past ten years at my own work I see an interesting progression from 2 x 6 walls with fiberglass batts, poly vapor barrier and no questions asked to now where each house I do is a bit different and I spend much time investigating the options including what I can sell to the owner and what the contractor will actually build as well as what the budget will allow.

Dave: Bob - What is your "ideal" wall and roof system?

Bluetime Collaborative: as of today or what will it be next week? performance wise all foam on the outside with an empty 2 x 4 wall cavity inside.

Bluetime Collaborative: practical (cost /benefit analysis) double 2 x 4 stud 8 to 10" deep with 1 1/2" foam outside taped. up and over the roof if possible too.

Dave: With that much foam outside how to you detail door and window penetrations economically?

Bluetime Collaborative: that was my ideal performance scheme - not cost effective or very easy to detail. you see it sometimes on European passive house projects, often with the windows set to the inside face of the wall for increased thermal performance. Practical is 1 1/2" xps foam outside, (1" doesn't get the dew point out of the sheathing) and dense pack cellulose in the cavity. The question then becomes whether to set the windows and doors to the sheathing or block them out to the outside of the foam and strapping. (complicated layering and flashing) fortunately some window manufacturers are addressing this as I mentioned before with exterior jamb extensions. I also have a detail to allow an inswing exterior door to be mounted to the outside but still open nearly all the way. You can see it in the "Tiny House Plan for Sale"

Matt: Dave, if you want to see details on the 'all outside the wall' insulation plan you can download the REMOTE wall manual or look into the Canadian PERSIST method.

Matt: http://www.cchrc.org/

Bluetime Collaborative: foam on the outside works to get the dew point away from the sheathing but what about the ability of the wall to dry to the outside? I still have too many questions. I'm going to find a building scientist, knock him down and sit on his chest until he (or she) tells me what to do.

I hear you on that. One question: how do you figure out where dew point occurs for various times of the year within a wall?

Bluetime Collaborative : I think they look at the average temperature for the three coldest months (I could be wrong) because if the dew point occurs before the sheathing, water condenses on the sheathing itself and ices up rather than drying out. This is often a p...See More

Rui : good chat! With IBC 2009, the exterior wall design comes into question FINALLY, but only because the R-value is bumped up to 20 or (13+5). With the very first opportunity we had, we went with batt stud cavity R-13 insulation and R-5 continu...See More

Bluetime Collaborative : In VT and much of northern New England only 1" of ext foam puts the dew point in the sheathing too much of the time (rot issues) so we go with 1 1/2 to 2". Nominal vs actual doesn't seem to make it into codes either. a 2 x 6 wall with fib...See More

Rui: well that was exactly my next set of comments, the codes only go so far. Understanding the wall technology is more important than prescribed R values.

Bluetime Collaborative: reading...reading....

Dave: This is going to make a great blog post. I've been thinking about the wall section you sent for the last few days. I've also been thinking about this at a time where I'm detailing my own house. It's giving me a headache.

Bluetime Collaborative: Luckily we have GBA which has really become The on stop shop for learning. When I go to seminars for cont ed. it is all repeats of the discussions on GBA. Feel free to add questions you have, Environmental Building News is 1/2 mile away from my office - I have some contacts. http://www.energysmiths.com/ - Marc Rosenbaum is an excellent resource as well.

Dave: I'm scared of what the answers could be but I'm wondering about red cedars (non-rainscreen) over Zip System with closed cell poly (2x6 construction) and no vapor permeable membrane and an interior of veneer plaster. This is our standard wall these days...

Rui?:"Vaproshield" barrier

Bluetime Collaborative : vaproshield is an excellent product and what you use for an open rainscreen. I would look seriously at a rainscreen detail even just bumpy tevek type stuff. Rainscreen detailing is becoming code in parts of this country and if you did wood siding in some northern euro countries without rainscreen, they would look at you like you had two heads. I think the cedar works in your favor. We sometimes use New England white cedar from our local mill.

Greg: I am really not enthusiastic about the addition of low perm foam in thick layers to a wall system. Once you do this, you reverse to a drying to the inside wall system, and now suddenly every micro-climate needs to check the dew point location of their wall configuration to avert a disaster. To me this just does not make sense. A dry to the outside wall system is something that works over a wide climate range, and if AC is introduced, a smart vapor retarder like Membrain allows you to balance the drying performance for the summer.

Bluetime Collaborative: I'm starting toward the no foam on the outside idea as well. simply due to the drying thing. A local builder is liking Membrane and I tagged it elswhere for further study. We are lucky in VT as only people from out-of-state who build houses here seem to want A.C. We do seem to have extended very wet times (like now) every summer. I keep coming back to my oversimplified double stud wall for simplicity and low cost and excellent thermal performance. I've done it 1/2 doz times so far with different builders so the kinks are mostly worked out. Think of the inside 2 x 4 wall as just another interior wall.

This is typical of the conversation that goes on in the industry. Gregory La Vardera chimed in with this: "my opinion is the Building Sciences guys are brilliant, but rather insensitive to the practical side of what is easy or difficult, or even preposterous, to do in a house project. Even for a one of a kind custom show-off how energy efficient we can be house they can be a little over the top - never mind something we expect to be widely adopted across the entire housing industry." With which I would largely agree although I have found the building science folks around here seem to have a lot of practical knowledge gained from working closely with builders. LaVardera also linked me to a series of posts on his website detailing how the Swedes do things. If you go there, check out how they do windows - it's very cool. The swedes also don't do basements Grumpy architect alert: (Americans need basements because Americans have so much stuff) but have very nice foam slab forms that seem to have a durable cementitious outside surface rather than having to attach something to protect the foam afterwards. The Swedish system is built as much as possible in a factory which happens very little in the U.S. other than low cost modular type housing. There seems to be a big hump to get over in terms of creating factory built custom housing at a competitive price point. Also the Swedes don't seem to be afraid of Modern design. Perhaps that is also an American "thing"

Building Science gives me a headache.

Building Science gives me a headache. I read the usual sites: Greenbuildingadvisor.com, building science.com, plus a few others, I attend seminars, I get all the proper magazines, I belong to the correct organizations such as the USGBC. I'm a good little architect. But I am confused. The more I dive into building science the more questions I have – and therefore the less authoritative I sound in front of clients and I don't think clients want their architect to sound wishy-washy. Let me start by explaining building science. Building science is largely based on large amounts of cumulative experience (databases) probability and statistics. As I recall the story, Joe Lstiburek and his pals started buildingscience.com after going into thousands of houses near airports to upgrade insulation levels to provide better sound proofing. They saw lots of bad things (rot). This provided them with the beginnings of a large database of how houses are built in terms of what works and what doesn't – what details and systems result in greater failure rates as well as what works. A much larger database than Joe builder down the road who has built a few dozen houses in the past thirty years. Smart Joe-the-builders (notice I'm not saying Bob the builder...there's a reason for that...I'm tired of Bob jokes okay?) anyway, smart Joe-the-builders recognize that Joe-the-building-scientist has collected way more information and experience all in one place and is offering it out for free – or just about. Smart Joe-the-builders know that construction is a high liability proposition and anything they can do to limit that liability will help them sleep at night. You can probably replace Joe-the-builder with Bob-the-architect in the previous sentences and it would work fairly well. These Joe-the-building-scientist types are also very often engineers (which means they look at numbers a lot and when they build houses for themselves they cannot justify having windows because it blows their heat loss calculations right out...well...the window) Being numbery-engineery sorts they are able to take their observations from the databases of thousands of houses and figure out more specifically what is happening to cause the problems. Thus we have much more information now about, for instance, the importance of air sealing, controlled ventilation and gapping the siding away from the sheathing than we did ten years ago.

As an architect, fabulous new products come across my desk every day and the magazines are filled with advertisements. How to sort through all this? We architects look to building science to help us separate the wheat from the chaff. Who has done a study on this new and great sounding product? Was the study valid enough to take seriously? What is the builder input and reaction to this new product? What are the warranties? What is the science that the amazing claims are based upon. As an architect I realize that there is always someone with way more expertise and experience than myself and part of my job is to seek them out.

My thoughts along these lines started as an ongoing conversation with an equally confused builder friend of mine. This builder is a rare one who drags his crew to building science talks and seminars and is buddies with Alex Wilson et. al. over at Building Green. We have been trying to figure out what is the perfect enclosure for our local climate in terms of: Ease of construction – what can the carpenters understand and get behind? Budget constraints – most clients around here are have very limited budgets and just want more room; green building and lower heat bills through super-insulation are secondary. Simplicity – this cannot be understated as it affects all other issues. Use of commonly available and understood building materials and systems. Performance – why put tons of insulation in a wall if there is inadequate air sealing which renders the insulation nearly useless? So far, it has been our local experience that proprietary systems cost, at least marginally, more. There are some very good systems out there it should be noted, all with their share of positives and negatives What has a proven track record of performance with building science to back it up. Does a less than perfect installation negate any advantages or potentially cause more issues than a business as usual system of construction? How much of a difference is it really going to make – This may need some explaining and I will use the example of my own house. I burn about 4 cord of wood per year to stay cozy and warm. My house is very poorly insulated but fairly tight, mostly due to its simplicity. If I were to invest a large amount of time and money in air sealing, an HRV system, and more insulation, perhaps I might only burn 3 cords of wood per year. Big deal. But if I were heating with oil or gas it would be. In the locale where I live and work, this is the type of metric that must be addressed in any project. The builder, his crew and myself marched over to the offices of Building Green and sat ourselves down in the company of Peter Yost, a building scientist sort whom many of you would be familiar with from GreenbuildingAdvisor.com. Peter proceeded to confuse us all the more as he waved lots of numbers around. But we came out of the meeting with a reinforced sense of the importance of and methods of achieving a proper air seal (assume the wall will get wet – now how and when does it dry?) and the importance of dealing with gross water first and foremost (gross water is what comes out of the sky and dumps all over our buildings and splashes around a lot). We also came out with the increased sense that we need to look at enclosures as “systems” where one part of a system can only work optimally if used in a certain conjunction with other parts of the system. Phew. Did I mention that I have a building science headache? We also came out with more questions than we went in with. Sigh...

In an upcoming post I shall include parts of an online conversation between myself and other architect friends along these lines. Then I shall conclude with my inconclusive findings and recommendations.

Blog: Coffee with an Architect + Rural Studio

Coffee with an Architect is a blog that has really gotten rolling. Why is it suddenly everybody does this way better than me? In any case what caught my eye recently was some lovely photos of the rural studio work at Auburn University So I followed the link and found a treasure trove of beautiful images of projects completed in the Rural south.A bit of background on the rural Studio from the website

In 1993, two Auburn University architecture professors, Dennis K. Ruth and the late Samuel Mockbee, established the Auburn University Rural Studio in western Alabama within the university's School of Architecture. The Rural Studio, conceived as a strategy to improve the living conditions in rural Alabama while imparting practical experience to architecture students, completed its first project in 1994. In 2000, Andrew Freear was hired as thesis professor, and upon Mockbee's death, succeeded him as director while continuing to teach thesis. Under his guidance the focus has shifted from the design and construction of small homes to larger community projects.

They have created a huge portfolio of community projects and 20k houses. Here are a very few photos grabbed from the website:

Heating Options for a Small Home - Fine Homebuilding

Fine Homebuilding magazine has run a lovely and concise article by Martin Holladay this month (March 2011 actually) that covers the options for a small, low heat load home (my favorite type to design) What I like about this article is that it is simple and clean enough that I can ask clients to read it as a primer. Many of my houses are about 1/2 again energy star but only 2/3 passive house in terms of insulation. This is a low load house but not a no load house, a house that doesn't need radiant heat but everybody wants to spend the extra money on it anyway. There is rarely the budget for heat load analysis and heating system design by an engineery sort so what gets installed is a regular old boiler. In recent years this is not so much a problem because there are so many good options out there for modulating boilers and the regular heat folks are familiar with them. A decade ago, this meant a non-modulating boiler would be installed capable of putting out 100,000 Btu/hour even when the house only really needed 30,000. This meant the boiler cycled on and off and wasted lots of energy. ($$$) The article covers "using a furnace anyway" as well as providing brief information on Direct vent gas heaters, electric heat (good for very low heat load houses especially if you put the money saved by not installing a conventional heating system into photovoltaics), Minisplit heat pumps - an excellent, low(er) cost option that can also provide air conditioning and are very simple to install although you usually need a certified person to do the installing in order to obtain the warranty. And also connecting a simple hot water coil to your ERV of HRV. You do have one of these in your new house....don't you?The article is not available online without paying something (I suspect) so pay or pick an issue at the newstand. The Graphic below was an old scheme from when I was considering selling stock plans myself. My current collection (numbering exactly 1) can be accessed at Houseplans.com -

"Why Modern Architectural Education is Archaic" by Duo Dickenson

This from Duo Dickenson of CORA about the relevance of architectural education. (or lack thereof)

It is clear to me that the architectural profession’s cultural irrelevance (and thus mass unemployment) is born of intellectual distortion caused by an exclusive internal focus and “let them eat cake” attitude of contempt for the “bourgeois” outlook that asks more of buildings than what is asked of sculpture. The seeds of this attitude were planted in the way architects are educated. The resulting general cultural perception is that architects are as useful as couture fashion designers.

Read the full article here

Budget lessons for the architect (me)

Here is an interesting lesson to learn if I can figure out what it is. Perhaps writing this blog entry will help.I tend to attract the sort of client who wants a 2500 square foot house with porches, hardwood flooring, granite countertops and an attached garage and wants it for $275 K. If they don't flee the office in disgust when I tell them A: can't be done and B: my fees would definitely be more than $3000. (There will of course be someone who will “say” they can) What has happened too often to ignore in the past several years is that clients have come to me with a set of parameters (we architects refer to this as a program) The program consists of needs, wants, site and zoning issues, budget etc. Usually the budget requires a rethinking of needs vs wants and this is where things can get sticky. As I mentioned above, there will always be someone who will tell them they can have it all (meaning: let's wing it) and some clients will seek them out. A few years later when I see the project completed without me it is clear that either the budget was much more “flexible” than it was when they originally came to me or the “needs” list was pared down much more than what I was able to accomplish with them. I know I am not the best salesman, hoping instead that my obvious experience, references and air of quiet competence will engender trust (insert emoticon here) (real men don't use emoticons) There have been times when I have thought of a great solution to a design problem but scrapped it because it was a budget buster only to find out later when the clients went to another architect who came up with the same idea and “sold” it to the client. Discouraging. Perhaps the lesson is that I should take things a bit less personally and realize that other people's idea of budget is more flexible. Of course, I am often the second architect on a project because the first architect designed something too expensive to build...

Typical Simple Construction Drawing Set

This represents a typical Construction Drawing set for a simple house minus a site plan. It represents a bit over 100 hours of labor. Thought y'all might be interested. A more complete set would have framing on a separate sheet, Interior elevations at least of the kitchen and bathrooms, a site plan, Materials schedules usually called out on the floor plans, and separate electrical plans.

How to become an architect

People often tell me they took a drafting class in high school and thought about becoming an architect. I took a drafting class in high school and thought about becoming an architect. I suspect that few people have in idea of what it takes in terms of the whole process. First there is admission to a school of architecture. These tend to be highly competitive. My school accepted fewer than one in seven applicants the year I was accepted with admission to the rest of the school being much easier. Artistic talent, leadership skills and life experience were important. High school drafting class counted for nothing. The first year of architecture school is a bit like hazing and typically, about half drop out. Then you are in school (think massive debt) for 5 years at a minimum. Five years gets you a professional degree called a Barch which is a bit more than a regular bachelors but less than a masters. This degree is being phased out because it is becoming impractical to cram all the course work into five years. ( graduated with 181 credits) The new norm seems to be a 4 year degree resulting in a liberal arts type bachelors degree and an additional 2 to 3 years for a Masters degree in architecture.

Then comes post graduation internship (if you are lucky enough to get a position with an architecture firm) Working full time, the requirements for this can theoretically be met in about three years. I have heard that the average internship lasts 7 years but this seems to be a dirty little secret in the industry. My own internship was about 5 years worth of time spread over a much longer period of time because I spent so much time working as a carpenter. It took five years of actual internship because there are a specific set of criteria that must be met to satisfy the internship requirements which are often hard to accomplish without spending some time working in a large urban firm where a regular internship program is in place. Many graduates who go to work in larger firms with salaried positions never get around to taking the qualification exams to become licensed architects. They may not need the license for their job and it can be hard to study when you go home in the evening to a busy family and life.

The Exam(s) - Nine of them when I was becoming an architect. Nine exams which represented over $1000 in fees plus all the study materials which is a whole separate industry. In the old days the exams took place all at once over a 4 day period where you were locked in a room with a drafting table. Now you stare at a computer screen at a cubicle in a small room with flickering florescent lights overhead. (headache)

So, the whole process takes a minimum of 8 years but averages a lot longer. Probably not worth it from an accountant's point of view when looking at the yearly salary data that comes out courtesy of the American Institute of Architects. Then when you finally have license in hand and can legally call yourself an architect there are all the yearly fees and continuing education requirements that must be met to maintain the license. If you lapse on any of these you are not allowed to cannot continue to call yourself an architect.

Phew!

What architects don't know

Architecture is one of those professions where the more you know the more you know you don't know. Many architects don't know this. There are some who “float” and others who are in a constant state of continuing education. I am reminded of this by the large number of architects who state on their websites “We have always been green” but then you look at their projects with a trained eye and see otherwise. Geothermal heating or solar Photovoltaics on a house with 2 x 6 walls, probably insulated with fiberglass batts is an infraction I commonly see. Those architects who read this and don't see the hyppocracy in this example would be the example of “floaters”

NESEA Workshop in Brattleboro

Yesterday I attended a workshop put on by NESEA, the Northeast Sustainable Energy Association entitled "Residential Retrofits for Energy Efficiency and Sustainability" by Larry Harmon.  Usually I have to travel to Boston or Burlington to attend these which can be costly and time consuming so it was nice to have one a mile down the road from my offices.  There was a lot of good information and Larry is an engaging speaker.  The big things that I came away with were the reinforcement of what I have been learning about air sealing, venting, and insulation. 1-Seal completely before adding insulation.  -  Most contractors or architects probably don't grok the importance or level of thoroughness that is required here or realize the ramifications of doing a less than perfect job.  It is not just about energy loss and heating bills.  It is very much about how to make a house that will last 100 years or more.  There was much discussion and many slides of imperfect air sealing jobs and how they acellerated rot and mold problems.

2-Don't ventilate your roof!  That was so 80's and 90's.  Now, ten or more years later we get to see the nasty ramifications of venting your roof.  yuck!

There was a lot of other information which I may add in here over the next few days and some of which was rather techy involving cost analysis calculations and BTU's and therms, (oh My!)

What disturbed me as it often does at these events is the lack of local builders in attendance.  Of the 10% of local builders who care about building science and sustainbility issues, very few will go much further than a subscription to JLC.  I'm afraid that if I go out there and draw up plans for a house with an unvented roof or create specifications for enhanced air sealing, builders will simply refuse to follow the plans and convince the homeowners that the architect (me) is full of it.  It's an issue that I'm sure a lot of other architects face as well.  Although I suspect that 90% of architects don't really care about such things either.

Added the next day in response to a comment.

The presenter showed lots of slides of what happens when you leave a pencil size hole in the sealing of the attic before adding insulation. Basically air pressure turns it into an moisture laden air nozzle. All the moisture then condenses (dew point) on the sheathing and rots it through fast. Or it freezes on the underside of the sheathing then rains down on the insulation when it thaws.  Ventilation compounds this pressure effect.  The best method seams to be to bypass all these issues and spray the underside of the sheathing with closed cell foam which is what I specify on new construction and treat the attic as conditioned space.  Loose fill cellulose or fiberglass batts lose much of their insulating value when exposed to air movement.  Many independent tests in recent years have shown the temperature on the underside of the roof does not vary due to ventilation or no ventilation.  There were also slides of what happens when insulation is added to an existing house attic that previously had no problems other than high heat bills.  Suddenly the attic was cooler, the dew point moved to inside the attic and rot set in almost immediately.  board sheathing holds up better than plywood which holds up better than osb.

I get the feeling that as building science matures, ventilated roofs will become a way for architectural historians to date houses to a specific time period in the late 20th century and early 21st century.