Architectural designers and visual designers are not alone in their frustration at the design standards and guidelines of the Architectural Design Graphic Standards (ADG).
While the standards are meant to guide the practice of architecture in general, the standards have not always been aligned with the design and design-related work being done in the architecture community.
The ADG, a nonprofit organization, sets standards for all architectural design and construction.
In 2016, the ADG released the Architecture Modeling Standards, a guide to visual design and architecture that is used in almost every architectural project.
Advocates for the architectural community say that the standards lack transparency, accountability, and transparency that is in keeping with the architecture industry.
The ADG’s new guidelines are supposed to be “a way to get better design practices out into the open and to encourage architects to use the same standards for the whole industry,” said Michael Riedel, the executive director of the Association of Architects, Engineers and Architects (AAE).
In addition to transparency and accountability, Riedels group has long opposed the ADGs design standards.
In a letter sent to the ADGP last year, the AAE said that the ADGL standards have been used in “over half a million buildings across the world.”
The AAE added that the architectural industry is “in the midst of a crisis in which architects have been forced to abandon the use of their standards for almost a decade.”
Riedels letter states that the design of the new ADG standards is “deeply flawed and is antithetical to the vision of what the industry as a whole should be about.”
What’s Next?
The Architectural Code of Ethics is one of the most important codes in the architectural profession.
Its purpose is to protect the profession from misconduct.
The code has been endorsed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Architect Quality Assurance Institute (APIQI).
The codes principles of ethics are also the basis for the Architecturally Responsible Architecture Practice, or ARAP, which was created by the AAe to ensure that architects follow the principles of the code.
While some architects say the standards should be replaced with more transparent codes, others have voiced concerns about the ADGD.
One of the main issues is that the guidelines do not have a way to identify architects that are breaking the code, said Riedelt.
Instead, the guidelines require architects to sign a statement that “the Architect is aware of any breaches of the standards.”
The statement also states that a breach of the ADGFs code would result in the architect’s suspension from the profession and revocation of their licenses.
Many architects are unhappy that the codes standards are not public, said James Knecht, who chairs the ADGE.
“It’s just not the same as having a code to regulate an industry,” Knech said.
“It’s very important for architects to be able to make their case for a code of ethics and standards.”
The standards were approved by the Architect’s Standards Board (ASB) last year.
However, some of the architects that were part of the ASB have expressed concerns about their ability to hold their own against the ADGI’s design standards, and whether they can be relied on to follow them.
According to Riedes letter to the AAE, the APIQI also has concerns about how the ADGHs standards are being used and adopted.
Riesen, however, believes that the new standards will help to ensure a safe and productive architecture profession.
A spokesman for the ADEG said that he is not aware of the letter and declined to comment further.
Editor’s note: This article has been updated to include comments from the Architects Association of America and the AAEs executive director.
The AAE also noted that the AAEF has been a supporter of the Standards Board and APIQIs code of ethical principles.
