Some very angry architects

My Mother is an Architect out West and also holds her Realtors license, mainly due to the fact that she never wants to stop learning. There are many very good and very important reasons to hire an Architect. There are also plenty of reasons to hire a contractor, as long as they are licensed and have great referrals which can be checked. Sometimes, for a smallish type job you described, a contractor is perfectly fine and hiring an Architect can be overkill for many people.

On the other hand, if you can afford it, an Architect is your fail safe mechanism and your trusted advisor. I for one would always hire an Architect if it involves anything to do– outside of cosmetics – with changing the structure, renovating a historic home, having a new home built on land that I own, and for a major remodel which would involve dealing with the sometimes Byzantine nature of your local city and town planning boards and permit requirements. Not that this is impossible to do by yourself, but you can find yourself in a lot of hot water and expense if you try to tackle that process by yourself and make a mistake. I had a neighbor having to rip out his entire kitchen renovation as it wouldn’t pass code. It looked great before he ripped it out, but he hired plumbers and electricians and no one pulled any permits. He was out to save a buck and it cost him a small fortune!

We have such a wealth of well educated people in and around Boston and we possess the ability to learn as much as we can about the construction or renovation. There are plenty of continuing education classes offered, so even if you don’t want to do the job yourself, this is a great way to educate yourself about the whole process so that you can make more informed decisions.

Since the requirements are so minimal to become a Real Estate Agent – 24 classroom hours – I would suggest that many people take the Real Estate Salesperson’s class. It will educate you about the whole process of buying or selling a home and what Realtors go through. There are many Real Estate Companies where you can work part time and at little – or no – expense. You may even sell a home or two to your circle of friends and make some money. In addition to that, you can save the buy side commission, which will lower your final cost when you buy a home. There shouldn’t be any outrage or nasty comments about this plan of action, as many Realtors have taken this route. Some stay with it and many drop out, whether they are full or part time. My wife worked in this manner as she could raise our 2 children. In addition to learning more about the business, she got us our home at a great price and sold a bunch of homes to a number of her friends and to my business associates!

Big surprise, the architects reaction reminds me of the realtors reaction to RedFin. In some states they went as far as suing the company.

If you are an intelligent person, are willing to do the research, can learn fast, and are willing to take risk, there is no limit for what you can do.

I love new business models that challenge the status quo.

"we liked the design options he presented us and we able to hammer out a plan that worked for us."

How can you say this statement in confidence? How do you really know which option would really serve your needs the best? Without an Architect to explain the nuances of design, you're really not getting the best results possible. Again you're not speaking intelligently about the subject.

I actually think you had a point on architects. Don't get me wrong - I think a good architect can add a lot, and I even seriously considered going to architecture school once upon a time (I decided I disliked poverty more than I liked architecture).

But a lot of architecture schools teach theory over beauty these days. And while there are many good architects out there, there are probably even more who would have made the end product much worse - think V shaped or flat roofs, both beloved of the architecture profession.

I think if you are not qualified to judge whether an architect is good or not, you are better off without one. Builders create a kind of guaranteed, tried and true, mediocrity. Architects create the spectacular - either spectacularly good, or spectacularly bad (see Boston City Hall & etc.).

What the builders build is much less likely to leak though.

Once again, don't get me wrong, good architects create buildings that are art. But bad architects try for art, and ignore the building. So much for commodity, firmness, and delight - architecture is NOT sculpture. And should not be.

as an aside, most architects are not exactly experts in structure. (nor do they claim to be, in general). That's the job of an engineer. The popular conception that architects are structure experts is not exactly based on a firm foundation.

Architects have a vital role IF (and that's a big if) executed properly. But structure isn't it, as a quick glance at the engineering fees in any proposal will quickly make clear.

Frank Lloyd Wright designs are esthetically pleasing (great architect) but often have leaky roofs. Practical ideas in this time of fiscal austerity are OK. Is an architect really necessary if all a person wants is a basic box structure?