having worked with many structural engineers, vivaladraughts personal experience has been – they are brilliant at analytical , mathematical , formula thinking. and many of them have told architectural designers, flat out – “they cannot do what the architectural designer does” – ie to design in the emotion of the structure. they use formula’s and mathematics to make sure the skyhook structure works. the working together of these 2 very different minds is critical to the outcome of the project.
simply put – if the one dabbles to much in the domain of the other – the end product will either fail or be a cold shell.
so now as a new day dawns and calculations dominate my creative design process – we give rise to the calcutect – this new form of creative design process is threatening the very fabrics and tools architectural designers work with – calcutecture is now written into our constitution by law and enforced by municipalities country wide – the advent of the analytical accountant like creative – supercedes the emotional creative – we are entering an era of small windows and large walls.
architecture is now dead – behold the rise calcutecture.
Are all professional architectural designers in the South African built environment landscape now finding it exceedingly difficult to get plans approved in the formal domestic sector? And hence are now finding it very, very difficult to earn a living. I have been walking plans and designing homes for over 20 years now. – I now find with all the new legislation and regulations being created by our regulatory body and the constant changing and fiddling of a system that worked – we are now left having to push a very over weighted , red tape animal up a very impossible hill. Regrettably this unchecked red tape hill is getting much steeper as the days progress. My main concern through all this regulatory body micro management is we now have 2 South African domestic built environment landscapes that have emerged. Running in exact opposite and contrasting directions and looking to never ever meet on any level in the future what so ever. creating 2 very different south african mindsets.
1) The over regulated domestic formal sector – which has now become a very financially viably, micro policed and regulated formal built environment.
2) And the absolutely under regulated or absolutely no council regulations at all, informal settlement built environment. our very own, unique south african, big city, frontier towns.
It is absolutely imperative that both the above built environment arenas should be policed and regulated with equal attention and measure. SA’s informal settlement frontier towns are growing at an alarming rate, right alongside our domestic formal cities. The families that live within these under regulated communities are suffering immensely, whilst the regulatory bodies focus all attention on ways to create financial opportunity through regulation of the formal domestic built environment. It appears our regulatory body is letting the public down massively, in both sectors. Extracting large volumes of cash from a formal home owner awaiting and wanting to build. Holding up plans approval and costing the SA home owner millions of rands, whilst appearing to not even bother creating built environment boundaries or regulations within the informal settlement sector.
I implore reasonable minds to help stop this machine – to insist regulatory bodies regulate with good sense – and let not the easy gain of money, be the reason to grind working South African systems to a complete and utter standstill. Applying first world legislation being hugely funded by ist world countries, within an African system only forces 2 streams to emerge – this is not the way to regulate SA. We need reasonable minds to prevail, we need good sense to come to the fore. we need people who are passionate about people and living conditions to regulate – money should not talk to the detriment of an existing professional platform.
vivaladraught – An absolutely exasperated and extremely desperate architectural professional.
SATAM – south african totalitarian architectural machine
vivaladraughts little cousin Vinny, a 3 year old pre-schooler is regulating the tuckshop line at his pre-school. he is creating his own regulating / protection body and making sure he is teaching the other pre-schoolers these protection tactics. for this he charges a fee, as well as fees for the important lessons he is teaching. vinny believes that by protecting the public from pre-schoolers and regulating the tuckshop line – he is building the future of his pre-school.
Merchandise from the worlds latest revolutionary character – Vivaladraught.
As architectural draughting is becoming a financially challenging occupation in this current economic climate, due to bureaucratic means and global financial meltdown. In order to still survive in these really interesting times – Vivaladraught merchandise is now available. T-shirts, masks, stickers can be ordered – however you will have to figure out where to place your order yourself . – details will then follow once trust is established.
T-shirts – R250
Stickers – R80
Masks – R60
When regulatory, academic and bureaucratic systems are being created or set up. It is prudent to remember that the systems created to commit red tape side hips will always backfire later. To oppress the portfolio that is seen to be the lowest on any systems rung, through possible subterfuge and possible means most foul, will be setting a precedent for later.
It is only a matter of time before the architecture of this created system is picked up by a more powerful force. That will crush the very creators of the system that they carefully put in place. To their minds most noble or to others ignoble intent.
Protect the least among us on the lowest rung and the system stays and will remain fair. It has been to this virtue and this virtue alone vivaladraught has championed the plight of the currently self employed architectural draughtsperson, on the South African employment landscape. So on the 11th hour of the 11th day of 2011 , Vivaladraught will end this campaign with the above sentiments. And what will be, will be.
However the warning is very clear and the shot over the bow is obvious , If the current architectural curators of this architectural system get it right to eliminate so easily the ability of the architectural draughting professional to earn a living. A living that they have been earning for 40 years. It will get it right to re-look at each registered member and demote those holding positions on higher rungs just as easily. Example – senior tech to architectural draughtsperson is not unlikely when a system is set up to red tape side hip.
a possible cpd solution – mentorship
one amicable possible idea of taking care of this sensitive issue going forward is possibly to put architects and the current architectural draughtspersons in the same space using the framework of cpd. an architectural draughtsperson registered before 2011 can spend a few hours with a registered sacap architect and both can benefit. design knowledge in exchange for cpd credits. this can be an important way architectural projects can improve without taking the jobs away from the draughtsperson. this means the existing set of registered sacap architectural draughtspersons can still work with a framework similar to the 500M2 rule framework with agreed adjustments.
it does need to be said that most architectural draughtspersons tend to be stronger on the technical aspects of draughting and in some cases less focused on the architectural aesthetics. that is why its imperative to set up a mentoring process which needs to be created to address shortfalls between architect and architectural draughtsperson. This allows a possibility for architects to get valuable cpd credits, for looking over certain sensitive proposals put forth by the current up to 2011 set of architectural draughtspersons. this architectural draughtsperson and architect liaison can be asked for on architectural jobs falling outside of the current idow bill but falling within the 500m2 rule. its an additional step for the architectural draughtsperson to get plans approved for which the architect gets cpd points and the draughtsperson does not need to give up the architectural client and job. however getting advise and mentorship from an architect design expert, the project and client wins. Our systems need to foster and encourage a sense of working together, not this suspicion of method and anger which is currently spewing forth from the current architectural curators of our system.
Because things are now moving at an incredible pace, on board notice 153 (2011) coupled with the fact that no one Vivaladraught knows has had any detailed response at all from SACAP as yet to queries, concerns and objections to board notice 153 (2011) gazetted on the 4th – back dated to the 1st and sent to registered members on the 11th by SACAP. Vivaladraught would be most grateful if you could please forward this blog post to all and sundry as an absolute urgency. or at the very least comment. please just take the vote – send this blog to the damn press if it resonates. Or just do nothing and read on to the end to understand the ramifications for us all – architect, technologist and draughty alike. Vivaladraught has several questions that need very urgent attention and responses from CBE , competitions board , the public , industry and all and sundry. (Yes that’s right even your aunt in poffadder needs to comment) before a conclusive decision can be fairly made regarding board notice 153 (2011.) Vivaladraught is challenging SACAP’s legality in publishing an interim policy document in the government gazette. The exact dates and backdates and the timing of the board notice being brought to the attention and communicated by SACAP to its registered members. This timing and obvious tardiness does not inspire confidence in the legality of publishing such a sensitive document. Which effects thousands of current working architectural draughting professionals. Vivaladraughts questions which need extremely urgent attention by the CBE and SACAP are 1) Was this process and timing of the gazette board notice 153 (2011) conducted in a fair and legal fashion? 2) Was the publishing of board notice 153 (2011) approved by the CBE before it was published. 3) Communication to members by SACAP of the publishing of board notice 153 (2011) was many days after it was published – it needs to be determined if this was a simple mistake or a tactic to allow a very sensitive document to pass under the radar. 4) To vivaladraughts knowledge, at no stage with the publication of board notice 153 (2011) did SACAP ask or want public comment and participation. Without doing this has SACAP council met with point 26 (1) b) any person, c) any body and d) any industry. Of the architectural profession act no 44 of 2000? 5) On publication of this board notice it immediately rendered many architectural draughtspersons – illegal, the implications of this are massive. 5.1) what is SACAP going to do in terms of notifying the registered persons and the public who are now engaged in illegal work in terms of this board notice 153 (2011)? 5.2) what is SACAP going to communicate to the registered persons who now find themselves alienated from the very jobs they have been doing very competently for many years. ? 6) The board notice 153 (2011) completely favors one minority VA under SACAP – that fact could cause doubt as to the fairness of the creation of such a document, when the CBE looks at the fact that architectural draughtspersons are not fairly represented on SACAPS council and committees. Architectural draughtspersons have been an integral part of the built environment landscape for 40 years. To suddenly render these professionals powerless to do the work they have been doing competently for all these years is a complete tragedy, that will have ramifications for years to come. Regulatory Councils need to give proper respect to current practicing professionals. And concentrate more on the education and framework of changing future generations of architectural professionals. Without trying to side hip currently self employed architectural draughtspersons in an already depleted South African workforce off the table. This climate of professional xenophobia needs to be addressed with the absolute respect and sensitivity it deserves. It needs to be SAID Vivaladraught is not wanting to become an architect – that would be way to complicated and really needs to be kept to the domain of the 6 year degree chaps. It also needs to be SAID that it was only a few short years ago that technologists and draughtspersons griped the same gripe about the mighty architect as we sat cheek by chowel in the professional trenches. Now the technologist has developed the same mighty opinion and seeks to kick the already economically down trodden draughty in the stomach. (Kicking in the head is still reserved for the chaps at the top.) its only a few short years now to the inevitable birth of the architectural design elite clergy class, which will give rise to an animal that will populate our cities with giant femdomes. When architect and technologists alike will be doing the same work and getting the pay the draughty now gets. –
so lets remember , remember this letter on the 5th 0f November 2011 – it effects you joe public – you never know whats next if regulatory bodies get this right, it might possibly be a law linked to architectural fee structures – its a guide now but you just never know whats around the next corner .