architangent

Advantages of Ranch-Style Homes

George Perry — Mon, 20 May 2013 16:21:33 +0000

English: 2,772 square foot Ranch House model in Shafter, California. 7/21/2007 Note side turned garage and multiple porches. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

When most people think of ranch-style, single-level homes, a few things come to mind: the MidWest, and retirement communities. While both of these ideas are valid, and in fact true, there are other advantages to stair-free homes beyond avoiding tornadoes and the constant danger of hip replacements from falling.

Open Floorplans

Yes, you can have open floor plans on colonial style homes as well, but there’s always going to be a divide thanks to the different floors. With a ranch-style home you’ll have everything on a single floor, which allows you to create a more open feeling with only the bedrooms closed off. Great rooms are increasingly popular in ranch-style homes, as they combine the living room, dining room, and family room into a single space, often with an open look into the kitchen, making them great for gatherings of friends and family – nobody is ever sectioned off in another room.

Better Use of Land

While building a multi-story home can mean a smaller foundation, which can in turn mean lower costs, ranch-style homes can make better use of the land they’re built on. Since the entirety of the home is on a single level, that means you can spread the home out more over the plot of land it’s being built on, meaning there’s less wasted space, and allowing for larger homes when desired.

In addition, ranch-style homes can cut costs through the use of square or rectangular foundations, whereas some multi-story homes, particularly the now mostly defunct McMansions, can have oddly shaped foundations with more than four corners, which can in turn impact the cost of building the foundation, and in turn the home.

Efficiency of Space

The problem with the McMansion explosion that happened before the collapse of the housing market in 2008 is that we ended up with way more space than we needed, which in turn lead us to purchase way more things that we needed. While you can certainly build a large ranch-style home, they trend towards the smaller size, which is perfect for those looking to eliminate the things in their lives (looking at you third couch) that aren’t really needed or aren’t used given how much space they take up.

Elderly and Disabled

For the elderly and those with long-term disabilities that impact their mobility, ranch-style living can be the difference between independence and regular care. Not having to worry about going up and down stairs to access the various rooms in your home means you don’t have to worry about the use of walkers, wheelchairs, or other mobility assisting devices that are often impacted by the inclusion of stairs.

About the Author

George R Perry works for Hazel Homes, a builder of new homes in Fredericksburg VA

and King George, including stair-free ranch-style homes. Contact them today to learn more about stair-free living at their Turnberry East community in Fredericksburg.

Confessions of a Contest Junkie: Why I Can’t Quit Design

Brinn — Sun, 12 May 2013 20:34:43 +0000

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: I’m a design contest junkie. I definitely have a love-hate relationship with design contests and competitions, but I keep coming back for more. I always wonder what it is that makes some people love the thrill of the game, while others loathe their existence and are adamant that competitions should not exist. I decided to take a look at my motivations for entering design contests and why I think it is ‘worth it’.

Design: Brinn Miracle
Renderings: Jerry Chen

The heart of the matter comes back to design. I love design – like, really love it. I think I may even make my husband jealous sometimes when I fawn over the latest building or product that is just ‘sooooo perfect’. I have a huge appreciation for design that is well thought out and executed. It really makes me happy. To be able to recognize a stroke of brilliance, a well crafted solution and appreciate the intentions and efforts put into it is something I can identify with; I hope my designs will resonate with others in a similar way that just…well, makes people happy. I think that is my ultimate driver in design: I want to improve the world around me so that people, upon seeing a design, sigh a happy sigh and go ‘ahhh, that makes life better and more beautiful’. I think at the root of all designers is a desire to improve the lives of those around us and it is the reason why it pains us to see bad designs: we know there is a better solution that will make people happy and we want to see that solution implemented.

In addition to a driving passion to improve my surroundings, I also love the thrill that design competitions offer. I’ve never been an adrenaline junkie; in fact, I dislike things that make me nervous or are scary. Yet, for some reason I love the rush of the design challenge, of submitting something for critique, the waiting period for judging and announcement of winners…I love all of that. I love looking through the other entries, and I love seeing all of the creative solutions to the same problem I was given. It is amazing to see how different people will take a single task and come up with amazing and diverse answers that I never would have considered. I think there is a kindred spirit even amongst competitors. It also helps me stay fresh and at the top of my game. Let’s face it: showing up and doing the same thing at work everyday can become a bit redundant even if you love what you do. Participating in competitions allows me to try my hand at things I may never otherwise design: skyscrapers, parks, theoretical floating villages. You name it, you can do it!

Of course, another reason is simple: winning is fun. Who doesn’t like to win now and then? It is sometimes easy to get caught up in the potential prizes, but for me (and likely for many people), the sheer act of being chosen for something is very meaningful. Architects and designers are awarded projects and jobs based on subjective opinions. Sometimes, it just feels nice to be the one that is chosen.

Loop Shelves
Design: Brinn Miracle
Renderings: Jerry Chen

So what about the practicalities? When does someone like me find time to participate in these types of competitions? Isn’t it just a game of chance, like winning the lottery? Well, yes and no. For me, I try to implement at least some strategy. Competitions definitely take up a decent amount of time. I can be the first to tell you that it can be a sacrifice to spend evenings and weekends at the drawing board, but who said good things would be easy? As for odds, it all depends on the contest. The fewer the entries, the better your chances in most cases. First, I pick contests that I’m passionate about. If the prize is great but I really don’t care about solving the design problem, I likely won’t come up with a very good solution. It’s practice for choosing clients and turning down ‘good work’ that isn’t a great fit. Next, I treat each contest as if it were a client: I craft my solution to the parameters of the project (the program), and I even go as far as to tailor some aspects to the jury, if I know something about them. How will they view the work? What are they looking for? What will speak to them? If possible, I try to participate in contests with a good public viewing option since it is a great way to share the design with a lot of people. Unfortunately, those tend to be the ones that require public participation in the form of voting. I have to admit, I don’t like the voting model very much. I think it detracts from the quality of the work presented and I think it wears out those who support me as a designer. Turning design contests into popularity contests isn’t the best way to promote good design. As fate would have it, the contests I have participated in have been mostly fueled by public votes. For better or worse, it seems to be an ongoing trend with the prolific social media and ‘sharing’ tools available. It makes sense for the contest sponsor, as they get a lot of traffic and views for their company. I just wish the judging and valuation of a design was not based on how many friends each person had and was selected based on merit alone. To each his own!

In the end, even if I don’t come out as the first place winner, I still find value in the participation. Above and beyond the aforementioned benefits, it adds something new to my portfolio. As a young designer, it is helpful to have a spread of projects that can be directly attributed to one or two people rather than a huge team where and individual’s role can get lost or diluted. Individual or small team projects can help define a young designer and position them where they want to go. These types of contests are also great at teaching management skills. It takes a lot of ambition, self discipline and communication to get a design off the ground, formatted and submitted. Even the ‘vote for me’ campaigns teach a lot about perseverance, public opinion and the importance of networking. At the end of the day, even if you don’t win, you have an awesome portfolio piece, more experience on honing your design and description skills and a boost for design appreciation. I encourage you to participate in a worthy competition – ones that are free to enter, benefit others or are just plain fun. We all could use a little more fun in life!

Support my ‘habit’

vote for my latest design

Voting ends May 15

I would love your support in my latest design contest which depends on public votes for 20% of the final score. I had the help of my amazingly talented friend, Jerry Chen, who supplied the renderings. He’s stuck with me through many competitions, providing the renderings for each contest we’ve done together. We make a great team, and I would love to finally be able to compensate him for his time and skills. This competition will award $20,000 to the first place winner and $5,000 to two runners up. Can I count on your votes to get us there? Just follow the link above, and enter your email to vote. You may vote once per email address. Thank you for supporting me & design!

Loop Shelves
Design: Brinn Miracle
Renderings: Jerry Chen

I was recently asked where I find the competitions to participate in. I tend to look on Death by Architecture, which keeps a list of all active competitions and you can sort by deadline, eligibility and more: http://www.deathbyarchitecture.com/searchCompetitions.html?method=SearchPublic

ARE Prep: Site Planning and Design

Brinn — Fri, 10 May 2013 20:26:55 +0000

It’s official: I’m 3 down, 1 pending results and only 3 exams left to take. I received my pass letter last week for SPD (Site planning and design). Following the same format as the previous ARE Prep articles, I’ll jump right in. Be sure to read the other ARE Prep articles for more tips, tricks and resources.

As a reminder, ARE candidates are not allowed to share specific exam content, so please don’t ask.

Materials I used for Site Planning and Design

The Site Planning and Design (SPD) exam consists of 65 multiple choice questions and two graphic vignettes: site grading and site design.

For the vignettes, I practiced with the NCARB software which you can find on their website here. Also available through the link is an exam guide for each section. I read through this before beginning my studies to get a good understanding of the type of content that would be covered and browsed the sample questions to gauge my knowledge on the topic and establish a baseline for my study timeline. I practiced the grading vignette about two times, and the site design about 3, focusing mostly on the parking. I uploaded solutions of both vignettes to the ARE Forum for comment.

The key to the grading vignette is to understand crowns, swales and the way water will flow down a hill. Mnemonics helps here to remember that “Crowns point down”, meaning that if you see a jog in the contour line pointing in the down hill direction, it is a crown. I found it helpful to sketch out crowns and swales in an isometric view to understand how dirt would be built up or dug out and visualize water flowing in or around it. The key to the site design vignette is to learn this parking lot method. It is the best way to draw the parking lots, so watch the videos and practice. Both of these vignettes required practice in order to become comfortable with the tools to where I could focus on meeting program requirements rather than how to make the tool work for me.

For the multiple choice, I used the following materials and resources:

NCARB Exam Guide

Ballast Review Manual (comprehensive study book on all ARE divisions)

Ballast sample problems and practice exams

Gang Chen’s Mock Exam book

NALSA iphone flashcards during lunch breaks

Random browsing through Forum posts from those who passed and failed the exam

Be sure to check out all of the study materials I’ve used or plan to use for ALL exams here.

Timeline for studying

I began studying for site planning and design concurrently with programming planning and practice. Cumulatively, I spent about 3 weeks preparing for site planning and design (going out of the country for business travel forced my testing dates to change around and extended my study time, though it was not necessary). This exam has the second highest pass rate after Schematic Design, so 3-4 weeks should be plenty for most people.

General Content Focus

Site planning and design felt very straightforward and very simple. The questions were on par with the NCARB practice exam and I did not feel that anything was too far left field. Know basic definitions and common terms and focus mainly on concepts. Construction Documents and Services questions will likely pop up through all tests, so be sure to do a once-over review of the contracts. Understand soil types and foundation types in broad conceptual ways: why is clay bad for foundations? What type of foundation would help counter the negatives of clay soils?

General Tips and Tricks

The vignettes felt straightforward and very similar to the NCARB practice examples. Be sure to spend time practicing so you are comfortable with the tools! Post your results on the forum since there are many programmatic elements that can easily be overlooked. A second set of eyes will help train you on what to look for. The key to the vignettes is practice.

For the multiple choice questions, think about broad concepts and how they apply to the question at hand.

Remember: More concepts, less facts.

I’ve created a spread sheet with links to all of the materials I’ve found and you can find it here. There is a tab for each division and items in bold are things I felt were especially helpful. Don’t forget you can also check out my Amazon store for direct links to study books if you need to purchase them. I find that the Ballast and Chen books in combination with the NCARB practice exam are enough for me to feel confident in the material.

Tune in next time for a review of Programming Planning and Practice.

The Hidden Costs of ICF: The Value of Insulated Concrete Forms

Brinn — Sun, 05 May 2013 03:04:01 +0000

As we continue the process of designing and building our home, we are at the stage where we are faced with making decisions. Our first big choice is critical to the rest of the design and has a big impact on the overall cost. The building envelope, otherwise referred to as the wall construction type, is a high cost item, and can affect aesthetics significantly. One of our goals is to create a design that is sustainable, and for an exterior wall, that usually equates to energy efficiency.

Insulated concrete forms (ICF) offer a high level of energy efficiency compared to traditional ‘stick built’ wood framed walls. ICF construction is essentially a concrete and foam sandwich which is put together like a set of Legos on site. Once the foam blocks are in place, concrete is poured in the center cavity and allowed to set. This forms a sound structure with excellent thermal properties. The disadvantage of this type of construction is the overall wall thickness; ICF walls tend to be very thick, and total wall assemblies (the structure plus interior finish and exterior cladding) can be upwards of 14 inches thick. It is easy to see that choosing ICF means giving up some interior space to the wall.

insulating concrete forms (Photo credit: Frameform)

For our design, space is at a premium. We are on a relatively tight lot, and every square foot counts. During our late night study break, we took a walk and ended up discussing ICF as it relates to cost and square footage requirements. What we discovered was that at high level, ICF demands not only a cost premium, but a space premium. Here is what we worked through:

Using basic averages for our design, the house has about 620 linear feet of walls. If we multiply that out by 12 to convert feet to inches, we get 7,440 linear inches of wall. Next, we looked at the delta between an ICF wall thickness and a SIP (structural insulated panel) wall thickness. SIPs are similar to ICF walls in that they are a sandwich of foam and sheathing; typically a wood sheet is glued to the foam, or some types use steel studs (which is the kind we are considering). Basing our numbers on the products I’ve seen, there is a difference of about 5 inches between the two product types. That means for every linear inch of wall, we give up 5 inches of depth if we choose ICF construction. Length x width reveals that we lose 37,200 square inches to ICF; breaking that back into square feet for easy reference means we give up almost 260 square feet of space if we build with insulated concrete forms. That space is eaten up by the walls, and we’ll never get to enjoy it beyond the energy we save (i.e. dollars not spent on electricity).

The next big item we looked at was the cost of the lost square footage. If you build it, you pay for it, even if you never get to ‘use it’. For us, we multiplied out the cost for an ICF house by the lost 260 square feet and realized we would be spending a whopping $41,600 on lost space! Then we had to also account for the increased cost of ICF compared to our SIP alternative. The product I’m considering boasts that it comes in at half the price of ICF, so the delta between the two wall options means we’d spend an extra $20,000 to go with ICF over SIPs. Add the two numbers together, and we’d pay over $60,000 for lost space and the same R-value (which tells us how energy efficient the wall is). The increase in cost between the two walls types alone isn’t terrible, but once we account for the lost space due to increased wall thickness and look more closely at the two products side by side, we don’t add a lot of value for the increased cost.

Residential Application – Before (Photo credit: PorterSIPs)

Granted, we may lose out on some sound transmission advantages and additional natural disaster resistance, but conceptually, a well made and properly installed SIP wall should perform on par with an ICF wall at a much lower cost – both financially and spatially. When it comes down to energy efficiency, we wouldn’t see any kind of significant savings going with ICF compared to SIP, as the cost broken down over time would take decades or even centuries to pay back.

Finally, as our builder pointed out, we would also need to accommodate the added weight of the ICF structure on the foundation. That means a costlier foundation design that requires more engineering and more material (concrete, re-bar, deeper form work, deeper excavation, etc.). One decision quickly affects a host of other components.

Now that we’ve taken a high level look at the hidden costs of ICF, we can start to see that paying a lot more for lost space doesn’t make much sense for us. The premium we pay for space in the city only compounds this figure. We’ll be taking a closer look at these wall type choices and doing more research on the pros and cons of each before settling on a final choice; maybe we’ll find something that surprises us. Do you have experience with an ICF or SIP home? Let us know in the comments!

Dream Home: Diving into Details

Brinn — Wed, 03 Apr 2013 03:14:07 +0000

It has been some time since we initially purchased our property and shared our dream home design progress.

We were recently approached by an adjacent land owner who was interested in combining our properties and re-platting them lengthwise. Our current arrangement is a bit odd in that our typical city lot was divided ‘hamburger style’ instead of ‘hot dog’. Most city lots in Houston are approximately 50′ wide x 100′ deep. Any available properties or ‘tear down’ quality homes are snatched up by developers and re-platted into two long, skinny lots that will accommodate townhouses. Since our property was divided into two lots sized approximately 65′ wide x 45′ deep, it was unattractive to most developers; it wouldn’t be easy to place two town homes and make a profit. While this was an unusual and potentially problematic element for most buyers, it wasn’t for us. Over the last year, we have honed our design to take advantage of this unusual condition and have grown to really love the solution that fits on this property, and only this property. It is the unique condition that allows us to approach our house from a very different angle and gives us spaces that would not otherwise be possible. Below is a diagram of our property (the black square) in relation to the surroundings. If you’ve never been to Houston, this is no-zoning at its finest: A warehouse, a church, a park, a tear down, townhouses and empty lots all within a single block. And yes, we’re only a few blocks from the bars, too.

Quintessential Houston!

We had not intended to meet with builders for at least another 6 months, but due to this opportunity to combine properties, we were forced to quickly come up with an alternate design for the new condition and compare our options with builders for preliminary pricing (no sense in pursuing a design we couldn’t afford!). We really had to look at it from two perspectives: on one hand, it is our home, but on the other hand, it could potentially be much more of an investment than just a commodity. Below is the design I whipped up to see if we could get something we liked. The first level is on the left, followed by levels 2, 3, and roof deck. I tried to incorporate similar features as our original design, but the layout definitely changed the feeling and functionality even though the spaces were ‘the same’. It goes to show that how you put spaces together and their relationship to one another really impacts the overall quality of space!

Typical Townhouse style

The particulars of the financial analysis were a bit difficult, as the adjacent property is landlocked. Luckily, my husband is sort of a financial wizard and was able to analyze the situation (3 degrees in economics/finance count as wizardry in my book). Remember the hot dog/hamburger division? Well, since the lot was split in an odd way, the adjacent property has no street frontage (ours has access to a public Right of Way, but it is not paved…in the middle of the city). That means that ultimately, the ‘fair market value’ of the lot next door would be determined only by those property owners immediately adjacent to it (i.e. no one else would be able to access it). That meant us and one other party; the church next door. In theory, we would decide the price of the land since no one else would be interested in purchasing it. The only way to determine a fair value outside of a sale to yours truly was to look at the only other plausible alternative: donate it to the church as a tax-deductible contribution. The value of the adjacent property is only realized if and when it is combined with ours – on its own, the value is much less. This is an important point, since the difference in value between our property and the adjacent lot tells us what our financial incentive would be if we combined properties. In the end, we added the difference in property values to the cost of a typical town house design and compared it to the ballpark estimates for our current design. Ultimately, the benefit of combining properties and going with a typical design was rather small; just 11% of the value of our dream home.

What does all this mean? It means that for an 11% premium over a ‘typical design’, we could get the dream home we wanted, or we could put that cash in our pockets by combining properties. We also considered purchasing the property outright and shifting our original design to the back in order to create a large front yard (great idea from my dad!), but there were issues with this as well. The lot narrows at the rear, and our house’s width is already tight. In addition, there was the possibility of over-developing for the neighborhood, higher taxes, and more operating costs (Mowing a big yard takes time, y’all!). Ultimately, we chose to pass on the option to combine or purchase and we are moving forward with our original design since an 11% increase in cost over typical was well worth it in order to get our unique design. (Below is our latest and greatest iteration – can you spot the changes?)

The latest house design

In tandem with our financial analysis of the adjacent property, we met with 3 local custom builders to get preliminary pricing based on our dream home schematic drawings. We wanted to get an early ballpark estimate of our construction cost before we made any decisions to combine properties or pursue our original design. I highly recommend the ‘design-build’ process, which gets a construction expert involved early in the design process and helps you know costs much earlier.

Two of the initial ball-park estimates came in at $150/SF and the outlying bid of $200/SF came from the ‘high end’ builder. The builder that gave the high estimate had unfortunately received some bad news just as I walked in for our meeting. I’m certain that pricing a new home was not at the forefront of his mind, and I certainly cannot blame him for throwing a number out based on ultra-high end designs in his portfolio (much higher end than we plan to build, i.e. imported everything). Given the other two estimates were on track with our own calculations and hypothesis, we were comfortable deciding to pursue our original design. The details will get worked out over the next year and the pricing will adjust to fit those choices.

We now find ourselves at the point of endless choices. Up to now, the focus has been on making the spaces work – did the volumes make sense, did the plan layout flow well, did the functions meet our anticipated needs? Now, we will do a more in depth code review, product search and systems investigation to make sure everything works together and meets all the various legal requirements to the “T”. We’re considering Insulated Concrete Forms (ICF), metal stud construction, and rain screen cladding options among other things. The cladding itself could end up being terracotta panels, fiber cement boards, slim brick panels, or even weathering steel sheets. We are now getting into the ‘truth in materials’ debate as we consider which materials are best suited to the climate, application and aesthetic goals we have. We are also scrutinizing our priorities to predetermine where we want to spend our money if we need to value-engineer some things and bring costs down. Even a dream home requires compromise.

Weathering steel (Photo credit: Newtown grafitti)

By another stroke of financial wizardry, we are looking at breaking ground much sooner than expected; likely fall of next year. That means we have to spend our weekends figuring out these questions, getting it drawn up and landing on a final pricing structure with the builder. It may seem like a long time, but in the design world, that will go very quickly.

I’ll be writing about the dream home decisions as we think about them, including posts on various products, systems and services that we are considering: home automation, rain screens, weathering steel – you name it! If there is something you want to know more about, let me know in the comments section and I’ll try to write a post on it. We are even open to talking about budgets, and I may focus an article on ‘how to afford design’. It’s always been a question that plagues new designers and potential clients: how much does it cost? I think it is a disservice to talk about everything except the cost when discussing design – cost is pivotal and we consider this a learning opportunity. We hope you’ll see it that way too.

Stay tuned for more updates, images and plenty of scrutiny as we progress through the process of design. If you want to see images of design inspirations and our potential products, be sure to follow my Rose Street boards on Pinterest and brush up on the design process via the series of articles I wrote for Archability. Until next time!

Home Style Evolution: Closed to Open, Large to Small

George Perry — Mon, 25 Mar 2013 13:44:26 +0000

Homes, much like all things, evolve over time. We remodel them, we change things we liked years before, and we sell them to new owners with new tastes that start the cycle all over again. Home styles also evolve. In recent years we’ve seen home size contract while floorplans themselves have opened up.

So why have homes evolved this way? What other home style changes can we expect in the future?

Large to Small

In the last 5 to 6 years home size has decreased, with new homes being, on average, 200 square feet smaller than their pre-2008 averages. The financial crisis, and the resulting bursting of the housing bubble, played a large part in this, but even as we see new home sales increasing, home sizes are not. The death knell of the “McMansion” has been rung, and new home buyers are focusing more on purchasing homes that they can afford and that suit their needs.

New homeowners are also assessing what parts of their homes they use and investing in those, while minimizing or even eliminating those spaces that are rarely or never used. Formal dining rooms, formal living rooms, and home offices are all seeing themselves replaced with space that is actually used. Living and dining rooms are rarely used in modern homes, with larger, more modern kitchens having places to eat, and media rooms causing traditional living rooms to see their usage drop off. Laptops, tablets, and smartphones, as well as the growth of wireless high speed internet, have made the home office superfluous in many homes as home computing can now be done from anywhere in the home.

These eliminations have resulted in the more efficient use of home space, and the general downsizing of homes as compared to where they were earlier in the last 10 years. It’s also resulted in a change to how floorplans are being laid out.

Closed to Open

Think back to the house you grew up in. It probably had a lot of sectioned off rooms. I know that in mine you couldn’t see the kitchen from the dining room or the living room. While it certainly made for better games of Hide & Seek, it also made the home feel very segmented. That trend, however, has changed in recent years.

While home sizes have declined, floorplans have opened up. The more efficient use of space has played a large part in this, as has the elimination or downgrading in importance of rooms that aren’t used as much. While your old home had separate living and dining rooms, most new homes see them blended together, with no separation between the two. Newer homes feature floorplans that allow you to view more than one room at a time and, in some cases, even an entire level of the home at once.

Home Predictions

So what does the future hold for homes? While many believe that more individuals and families will leave the suburbs and return to the city, the IFDA (International Furnishings & Design Association) recently released their predictions for how we’ll live in the year 2020.

The predictions follow the trends we’re already seeing – a decrease in overall home size, the combining of some rooms so that others, the dining room in particular, disappear, and an increased presence for technology in the home. They did, however, predict that more homes will have a home office by 2020, more than one in fact. This may be a result of more individuals working from their homes all or part of the time as technology and the internet make being on-site for your job increasingly unnecessary.

What do you think home designs will be like by 2020? Do you see homes reverting to their pre-housing bubble size, or will the current trend of downsizing continue?

About the Author

George R Perry works for Madison Homebuilders, a custom home builder in South Carolina that specializes in built on your lot homes. To learn more about Madison Homebuilders, or to view their home floorplans, visit them online at MadisonHomebuilders.net .

ARE Prep: Construction Documents and Services

Brinn — Wed, 06 Mar 2013 17:25:52 +0000

I was excited to receive notification that I passed my latest ARE: Construction Documents and Services. For those just joining in on the series, the Architect Registration Examination (ARE) consists of 7 exams and is required to obtain an architecture license. This series of posts outlines the study tools I used in preparation and chronicles the journey towards my licensing goal.

As a reminder, ARE candidates are not allowed to share specific exam content, so please don’t ask.

Materials I used for Construction Documents and Services

The construction documents and services (CDS) exam consists of 100 multiple choice questions and one building section graphic vignette.

For the vignette, I practiced with the NCARB software which you can find on their website here. Also available through the link is an exam guide for each section. I read through this before beginning my studies to get a good understanding of the type of content that would be covered and browsed the sample questions to gauge my knowledge on the topic and establish a baseline for my study timeline. I practiced the vignette about two times, and did not upload my solutions to the ARE Forum.

For the multiple choice, I used the following materials and resources:

NCARB Exam Guide

AIA Contracts (2007 Version) Available for free to ARE Candidates

Ballast Review Manual (comprehensive study book on all ARE divisions)

Ballast sample problems and practice exams

Gang Chen’s Mock Exam book

Schiff Hardin audio lectures on the legal perspective of architecture practice and contracts

AIA Contracts – A201 General Conditions “Cliff Notes” from forum user, found here: http://www.areforum.org/up/Construction%20Documents%20and%20Services/Laz’s%20AIA%20Document%20A201%20Cliff%20Notes%20Version.pdf

NALSA iphone flashcards during lunch breaks

Random browsing through Forum posts from those who passed and failed the exam

Browsed IBC and other codes online for free

Timeline for studying

I initially gave myself 1 month (4 weeks) to prepare for this exam. Due to work stress and life stress, I felt unprepared and extended my study time by 2 full extra weekends. (2.5 weeks) In the end I felt much more prepared going into the test, and I was glad I rescheduled. I think I would estimate about 4 weeks study time in general for this exam. While many people find the Schiff Hardin lectures very helpful, I found them to be only marginally useful because I am a visual learner and the audio format did little for me beyond what I read in the books. In terms of exam preparation, listen to the lectures if you are an audio learner, but skip them for now if you are a visual learner; create a summary outline of the AIA contract documents instead. (These lectures are still useful for general knowledge and understanding of legal implications in our industry, so listen to them at some point)

General Content Focus

The hard part about the multiple choice tests is that you can never know when you’ve studied ‘enough’. The content varies between candidates and there will be overlap between exams, too. Approximately half of the material I covered did not show up in my exam, and I had about 25 questions I flagged to review by the end of the test. At least 10 questions were completely left field or had little to do with actual construction documents. The key to content is to understand concepts and application. Understanding the roles and responsibilities (action items and legal implications) of all project team members is important when you get ‘scenario’ based questions. Plenty of questions will force you to put on your thinking cap and figure out what the question is really asking and how the hypothetical situation would be handled. I found this forum thread after my test and I think it is a good way to catch those tough or tricky questions: http://ironwarrior.org/ARE/Flat’s_Kick_the_ARE_MC_in_the_Butt.pdf This list of questions is a good litmus test for where you stand in terms of preparation. If you know at least 70% of the answers, you are doing well. If not, keep studying.

General Tips and Tricks

I found that the vignette was rather straightforward and did not require any ‘input’ or creative solutions on my part warranting a review of my solution from the forum. The building section vignette should be simple if you pay close attention to the program, double check your drawing and make sure everything aligns. All of the information is given to you in either graphic or written format, so simply ‘following directions’ in your section drawing should be enough. I did review some other member’s solutions to see what the common mistakes were (incorrectly sized ducts, missing an item that should show up, using the incorrect wall type, etc.). Again – pay close attention and double check everything.

For the multiple choice questions, I found that they were not as easy as the NCARB practice questions. They felt more on par with the Ballast and Chen books in terms of wording, phrasing, and general content. While studying I found many of the questions in the study books to be confusing, poorly phrased and full of errors (grammar, spelling, etc.). Ultimately I found that these ‘poorly framed questions’ were actually very similar to the real test questions. Some of the exam questions made me wonder if it was a statement and not a question. Get used to the study books and it should serve you well come exam time.

Remember: More concepts, less facts.

Here are some helpful forum links that may be beneficial as review after core studying:

Study Notes

Forum CDS index

ADA flashcards and more ADA flashcards

Secret: you can check your results earlier if you go to your state board profile (at least in Texas). Find out the results about a week earlier than the letter arrives.

Popular Southern Home Styles

George Perry — Tue, 05 Mar 2013 14:56:52 +0000

The south is known for beautiful homes that have stood the test of time and even to this day are highly sought after by potential home-buyers. While custom home builders can build you any type of home you want, there are still three popular styles of home that can be found from the inland areas to the coastal region, and everywhere in between. So what are these home styles that are popular and can be found throughout the South?

Plantation Style Homes

Image Courtesy of http://www.flickr.com/photos/madeleine_h/

Anybody that’s ever been south of the Mason-Dixon line has seen a plantation style home, but they’re particularly popular in South Carolina. Places like Columbia and other inland cities feature these beautiful homes influenced by neoclassical and French colonial architectural styles in abundance.

Plantation style homes are large and typically feature large front porches and entrances, often with Greek influenced columns of some sort, as well as kitchens in the rear of the home, a nod to a time when the cellar would be outside the rear of the home. While it’s less common to see them built today, they are indicative of South Carolina and a beauty to see when they’ve been well maintained.

Low Country Style Homes

Found more in the coastal regions, the Low Country style of home was designed to withstand heavy rains and floods, with the first floor being elevated to protect against high waters. Much like the plantation style, the Low Country style often features a prominent porch, but that is where the similarities between the two typically end.

While the plantation style home features a rear situated kitchen, the Low Country typically has a centrally located one, making it a more prominent part of the home, and often a focal point of gatherings between friends and family. The homes also tend to be a single level, with any upper floors being additional storage or recreational rooms that get used less often.

Low Country style homes are still being built, though with more modern materials, in the coastal areas of the South where winds, rains, and flooding is a concern even to this day. Modern building techniques have made them more durable against the extreme weather they were designed to withstand, but the same basic design principles that were used 100 years ago are still in use today.

Single Style Homes

Image Courtesy of http://www.flickr.com/photos/savannahgrandfather/304917720/

Popular in small city lots found in both inland and coastal cities, the closest comparison would be to the modern townhouse or row house. Unlike more modern versions, the Single style home has the sides facing the street and isn’t necessarily connected to adjacent homes. Like modern townhomes, the Single style is longer than it is wide, meaning rooms such as the living room and kitchen can take up most or all of an entire floor.

Much like the plantation and low country styles, the Single often features wood flooring that is covered where needed by area rugs. These homes are almost exclusively found in cities where land is at a premium, as they were designed to fit in small, narrow lots, while the plantation and low country fit into larger, spacious lots.

Newer Styles

While the Single, Low Country, and Plantation styles are popular throughout Southern and coastal states, a designer or builder can offer a wide variety of home models that will suit any lot size and taste. Consult with your designer and builder to see if a classic Southern style of home is right for you.

About the Author

George Perry works for Madison Homebuilders, a home builder in Columbia, South Carolina specializing in built on your lot homes. To learn more about Madison Homebuilders, or to schedule a visit to their showroom, visit them at http://www.madisonhomebuilders.net .

Architecture and Design: Construction Administration 101

Brinn — Fri, 25 Jan 2013 01:09:42 +0000

The final part of the Architecture and Design 101 series is finally here! Check out the full guest post on Archability via this link.

I hope you enjoyed the series!

ARE Prep: Schematic Design

Brinn — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 14:30:59 +0000

As I journey towards my goal of becoming a licensed architect, I want to share my experiences so that others on this journey can learn and be encouraged. As you may remember, my goal is to complete my six remaining exams in six months. Before the details get too fuzzy I wanted to share what I did to prepare for Schematic Design.

As a reminder, ARE candidates are not allowed to share specific exam content, so please don’t ask. That being said, I’ll keep the format simple:

Materials I used + References to any websites or specific knowledge
Timeline for studying
General content to focus on or ignore
General tips and tricks

Materials I used for Schematic Design

Given that this exam has no multiple choice questions and only tests using the graphic vignette software, I practiced with the NCARB software which you can find on their website here. Also available through the link is an exam guide for each section. I read through this before beginning on the practice software to get a good understanding of the type of content that would be covered. Beyond this, I uploaded one solution each for the Interior Layout and Building Layout graphic vignette to the ARE Forum. There, other members will critique and advise on possible errors. I found that my first practice vignette raised a few red flags from members, which helped me realize which items to pay more attention to the second try. After uploading my second attempt and receiving no ‘error warnings’, I practiced the Interior layout once more and moved on to the Building Layout vignette.

Timeline for studying

I practiced the software for about 3 weeks, on the weekends only. In that time I felt I had plenty of time to go through the practice software instructions, try 3-4 interior layout vignettes and complete 2-3 building vignettes (including posting them to the forum for feedback). Practicing should help improve speed and drive home the techniques.

General Content Focus

Schematic Design is not about design. It is about fitting program into a pre-determined area and avoiding life safety issues. Focus on meeting the requirements called out in the program and spend your time reviewing that all of the technical aspects are met (Did you measure your corridor width? Did you remember to create a wall opening between adjoining corridors? Do your doors swing the correct direction?).

General Tips and Tricks

In general, the ARE Forum can be a bit tricky to navigate and takes a lot of time to get through to the good information. I’ve started a spreadsheet where I copy down links to important or useful threads as well as to outside content that may be useful to studying. This way I don’t have to reference the website as often, and in the future I hope to provide it as a comprehensive e-book (hey, maybe I could recoup some of the costs of exams?!).

That being said, I found this approach to the interior layout vignette to be helpful: when you begin the interior layout, draw a pile of turning circles (5′-0″), egress circles (3′-0″) and door push/pull boxes (4′x4′, 4.5′x5′). This way you can just move them around instead of having to participate in the tedious movement known as ‘drawing’ in this software.

I also found these links to be helpful in trying to get the ‘alternative layouts’ (problems created by users to practice the interior and building layout problems) working:

Link 1 - forum thread
Link 2 - forum thread
Link 3 - Alt Layout files
Link 4 - Alt Layout files
Link 5 - Alt Layout instructions

That’s all for Schematic Design. I received a PASS on my first try and felt really good on timing and technique. I felt I had adequate preparation (possibly even too much) and I didn’t feel rushed during the exam. Up next: Construction Documents and Services on February 1.