By continuing to use the site you agree to our Privacy & Cookies policy

Your browser seems to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser.

Close

Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Close

Paul McGrath

Paul McGrath

Recent activity

Comments (21)

  • Comment on: Micro-homes: part of the solution or part of the problem?

    Paul McGrath's comment 16-Jan-2015 2:31 pm

    As a long term supporter of so-called micro-homes (a nomenclature which is only possible if a minimum benchmark is generally recognised) 37m2 seems rather an arbitrary figure to define the "bottom" considering students live quite happily in self-contained spaces much smaller in area. Of this I have personal experience - not as a student - but as a responsible designer of student accommodation. I have also lived quite contentedly in a self-contained home having a total area (GIA) of 12.5m2 (that I personally designed) for nine years. So I feel well qualified to offer opinions that are based on a whole raft of personal experience that I am able to draw upon when claiming that micro-homes have a role in providing suitable accommodation.

  • Comment on: Micro-homes: part of the solution or part of the problem?

    Paul McGrath's comment 15-Jan-2015 11:01 am

    The key aspect of micro homes is that they should be well designed, so that there are places to store skate boards and provide private indoor and outdoor communal spaces. The big practices that monopolise housing, who sit on committee's and also work for the leading housing associations aren't renowned for "innovative" housing. In truth, UK large mass housing has become somewhat formulaic as the plethora of housing guides demonstrates. It is the small scale architects and developers - like Pocket - who are small enough to be more responsive and astute enough to meet constantly changing demands who are thinking creatively about how to solve the housing crisis. There is also the question of who determines what "well designed" micro-housing might look like. Putting that responsibility on the planning system is unlikely to produce constructive conversations with planners around the merits of using space more efficiently. Clearly, any architect or developer who wants to "innovate" will in future have their wings clipped by the proposed minimum space standards if they stay in their current form. By using architects creatively to demonstrate to politicians what life could be like at the smaller scale can, Pocket can only be applauded.

  • Comment on: Last chance to fill out the survey: Should the title of architect be protected?

    Paul McGrath's comment 6-Mar-2014 10:47 am

    My view is the role should have 'protection' through educational standards and understandable measures of competency. It is unacceptable that untrained, uneducated people can be regarded by uninformed clients as being similar to highly educated and skilled 'architects'. It is that association which will always threaten to devalue the profession. As a Part 2, I am in favour of a system of voluntary registration for all those who practice architecture and have an architectural education. (For example for Part 2's working in offices.) The legal protection of the title of architect however, means little to the wider public and some clients but the role of the architect is still highly respected. To my way of thinking, professional credibility has nothing to do with legally enforced titles.

  • Comment on: Profession hits out at shake-up of RIBA membership categories

    Paul McGrath's comment 26-Sep-2013 4:41 pm

    If you check the membership of the RIBA, I think you will find there are many 'Honorary Fellowships' of the RIBA who are entitled to use the initials Hon FRIBA after their name who are not registered architects. As far as I know the ARB have chosen not to test the validity of this through the Courts. Therefore, the ARB should surely take a pragmatic view of the affix RIBA with those who have an architectural qualification.

  • Comment on: Profession hits out at shake-up of RIBA membership categories

    Paul McGrath's comment 26-Sep-2013 12:37 pm

    I applaud the RIBA for taking this necessary step. It is long overdue. As a 'qualified' Part 2, having never considered joining the RIBA, I will now be doing so at the first opportunity. Where previously for me at least, 'student' membership had no credence the suggested changes give some recognition for a minimum of 5 years study. Having a post graduate qualification immediately puts you in the top 5% of the population (by qualification) and it has always struck me as ludicrous the architectural profession unlike some other professions, gives no recognition at all to highly qualified graduates who do not go on to register. It is a great shame that a vocal minority of 'registered' architects see this as a loss or a dilution and not an attempt to embrace people who play an important role in the wider architectural profession and in architects offices around the country. This type of protectionism does nothing to prevent the accusation that professions are elitist. This change now gives the non-registered the opportunity to support the profession through meaningful membership of the RIBA and I hope the RIBA will represent the opinions and well being of the non-registered. I assume the ARB will resist the use of the affix Associate RIBA by those who are not on the register and trust the RIBA will be robustly promoting the wider benefits of its decision. Far from confusing the public, this decision will further isolate the truly unqualified from tarnishing the reputation of the architectural profession. When all is said and done, you will still need a very high level of qualification and integrity to join the RIBA and that is what the wider public will clearly understand.

View all comments

The searchable digital buildings archive with drawings from more than 1,500 projects

AJ newsletters

Jobs

Architect

Competitive Salary + Benefits

Associate Architect (Residential Division)

£35000 - 60000 per year +