|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
yxh0300
Joined: 09 Nov 2007
Posts: 7
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2007 8:40 pm Post subject: Frustration with the architecture firm |
    |
|
| We worked with an architecture firm to design our future house. We gave the firm a draft drawing of the shape of the house - shaped like a boomeran. The firm gave us 7 schematics which were all rectangular or L-shaped. We really didn't like them so we send them our plan again and told them to use this as the basis of future design work. Guess what? The next thing we know, we get a letter from them stating that they don't feel they can work with us. Never mind the thousands of dollars we paid them for these useless schematics - this is just unbelievable. It is the first time we have dealt with an architecture firm. Does this kind of thing happen often? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
csintexas
millennium club
Joined: 06 Feb 2006
Posts: 1668
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
They need to refund your money.
If you told them up front you want a boomerang shaped house and they have some sort of objection to designing one then they should not have taken the job.
No this does not happen very often but you will occasionally find architects who want to specialize in their particular style. (Again they should have been up front with that information)
Next time I guess you will need to ask specifically if they have any objections to designing a house the way you want it. Unfortunately architects these days are trained to be artists and sometimes believe if they design a house like the customer wants they are compromising their artistic expression. You can also look for an anti-architect (residential designer)  they are generally easier to work with.
_________________
Chris Stewart
Modern Texas Home Project |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yxh0300
Joined: 09 Nov 2007
Posts: 7
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thanks for your reply. I was thinking about this these couple days. This is really about the relationship between the architects and the customer. Who should compromise? Yes, we gave them the boomerang plan but we also wanted to see what they would come up with. If they could provide a better plan, of course we would take it. After all we are not professional architects. That is why architects are paid for their job. It is really hard to know what should be clarified up front. We know better after we experienced, meaning we paid for the tuition. I guess that is why building a custom house is not for your regular Joe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lekizz
millennium club
Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 1000
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
From your description of events it sounds like you chose to work with quite traditional house designers, who were unwilling to do curves or angles. Traditional building materials lend themselves better to rectilinear designs. I'm not justifying the actions of your 'architects' in any way, I agree with the other poster, IMO they should refund you.
Did you sit down and talk to your architect before you agreed to work with them? It is quite normal and sensible to find out beforehand which architect is the right person for your job.
And I'm just slightly curious why you wanted a 'boomerang' shaped house |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yxh0300
Joined: 09 Nov 2007
Posts: 7
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The reason we chose the boomerang shape is that the lot we have is a lake front pie shape lot. In order to get the most lake exposure, we think boomerang shape is the best. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
phansford
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 500
Location: SW Ohio
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 9:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
It is hard to fully discuss your situation as there are certainly issues on both sides that can't be explained briefly on a public forum.
I am an architect and yes - I have "fired" clients in the past or have chosen not to accept a commission. The reasons vary in each case.
Let's ignore the subtle architect bashing by some posters as it might not be germaine to your situation. Let's not worry whether you went to an architect who only does modern or only does traditional or only does Native American teepees. Let's assume you knew the reputation of the architect and you chose them accordingly.
First - in your defense. It is always important to develop a client's concept along with other concepts. Not just as a courtesy, but to truly study the potential of the idea. Whatever alternate designs are developed, they need to demonstrate the pros and cons of the client's idea. It might be a worthy idea and a good solution. It also might be a horrible idea and we would be remiss in our duties as professionals not to give you our opinion.
You need to review your agreement with the architect concerning the design process and whether they were to consider the "client provided design concept". If they were to consider it, then you have the right to ask and expect your idea to be developed to an equal level as their seven concepts. You could ask for (or sue) for a return of all or a portion of your fee.
Now the Architect's side of this - I am not a draftsman - that is not why you come to an architect. Architecture is problem solving. It is a process that allows clients to make informed decisions. We provide intangilbe benefits to your project. A draftsman gives you a set of drawings so you can obtain a building permit. An architect develops your project as a sequence of spaces and experiences that enhance how you live and how your house engages its environment (in your case the lake). Not to pat myself on the back, but our clients understand more fully the benefits we bring to the project after they have lived in the house for awhile.
If you had a clear idea about how you wanted the house, you should have hired a residential designer or a draftsman.
Your situation sounds exactly like a client we fired about two years ago. She never listened to our advice. She provided these horrendous little drawings of her house (it was an addition/renovation) that made no sense. At the start of the project, she seemed set in her ideas and we suggested she get a draftsman to just develop her ideas, but she stated she really wanted an architect to "design the project and valued our services." Well, it was a circus. She just wanted us to draw exactly what she wanted without our professional input. She changed things just to be contrary. Quite honestly, it was a matter of preserving our reputation for doing good design.
We finished schematics - invoiced her, got paid and terminated the contract. And for the zillionth time, told her she should just get a draftsman to draw up her ideas. We really felt she was wasting money with us just to say she had an architect work on the house - or to tell her friends how she had to tell the architect how to do his job, whichever would give her greater social standing. It's always nice when the client says things like "f-you - do as I tell you".
Typically - we stop these clients from coming into the firm - its a waste of time and money on both sides. This particular client was a referral - I should have checked into more deeply.
So I would ask you - are you in need of a draftsman or an architect. We make damn expensive draftsmen. Are you set in your idea of a boomerang - no matter the internal flow, or cost or visual end? Is so, you need a draftsman or a residential designer who will just do your drawings and not provide professional services.
And I will tell you, most architects will be leary of working with you now that you have been fired from one architect.
Good luck |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
csintexas
millennium club
Joined: 06 Feb 2006
Posts: 1668
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 10:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
No this is not complicated.
Every business has a right to choose what jobs they take on. But they should have taken the 5 minutes required to explain their policy before excepting this job.
My house is boomerang shaped. I don't know exactly what is wrong with that. I like my house. Any good designer will advise you as to potentially problems or possibly better alternatives.
I personally think all houses should be "green". Someday if I can I will only design "green" houses. If that becomes the case I think I would need to make sure my clients understand that.
_________________
Chris Stewart
Modern Texas Home Project |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
phansford
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 500
Location: SW Ohio
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Chris,
This really is about managing client expectations and good communications. Sometimes neither can be accomplished. I have a feeling that both play a part in the dissatification that yxh0300 is experiencing with this particular firm.
End result - she is unhappy and clearly the architect was not happy where this was heading. Cooler heads prevailed and stopped the project before it went any further. A lot of times this comes down to managing risk.
Over 20 years experience has given me the ability to read clients, but sometimes we miss or we take a project/client due to a reference. I like references, but they can also be problematic. We have had problems when the reference is from an acquaince rather then a past builder, past client, or someone who really knows what you do as a firm.
You try to do due dilgence in accepting clients, but sometimes there are issues that can't be seen until the project starts. I have made the habit of searching local court records online to see if they have a history. One client had 14 hits both as a business and personally. Nearly all for contracting work and then not paying for services rendered. We killed that project immediately and without letting the potential client know what we knew. Sometimes I will contact people to get references on clients. Then there are times we will require a retainer for new - unknown clients. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
phansford
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 500
Location: SW Ohio
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 11:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| csintexas wrote: | | I personally think all houses should be "green". Someday if I can I will only design "green" houses. If that becomes the case I think I would need to make sure my clients understand that. |
I have thought a little bit about this comment. There is no reason you shouldn't be designing Green houses. The cost of building green has been determined to be the same as not building green. (The cost is in getting LEED Certified and it that really necessary). You can design any house with local materials, control waste, select sustainable materials, provide natural light and ventalition, site the house to take advantage of solar gain and shading, and your client would never know its green. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
csintexas
millennium club
Joined: 06 Feb 2006
Posts: 1668
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You could certainly incorporate green ideas into any house but to really design a house to be green (in my opinion) takes a full effort.
for example: I just had a client that wanted 58 recess lights in their 3200 sq. ft. McMansion which they also provided the basic floor plan for. I told them it wouldn't be a very energy efficient house and I also told them I didn't particularly like the looks of it. I also point all my clients to my website which makes no doubt where I stand on the subject.
But that's what they wanted.
I couldn't do much for these people.
Today I'm working on a 5800 sq. ft. house that looks like it is on steroids trying to convince the owner that he doesn't really need a 10 high ceiling in the garage.
_________________
Chris Stewart
Modern Texas Home Project |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
phansford
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 500
Location: SW Ohio
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 1:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Chris - There is nothing wrong with 58 recessed lights in and of itself. Properly designed with multiswitching and/or dimmers, this will afford the owner great control over artifical lighting. If they go the full method and purchase the low-voltage switching system where they can select "scenes", they can actually reduce lighting costs.
IES states that 75% of electric bills in offices is due to lighting.
The other issue is the lamp selection. Incandscent lamps will be off the market by 2012, if all works as planned. Many of the building codes are headed in that direction.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0228/p01s03-ussc.html
So talk to your client about other lamp choices (as they might not be able to relamp their fixtures in 5 years) - in particular talk about lamp life. Compacts, Halides, and vapors can have lives of 10,000 to 20,000 hours compared to 3,500 hours for an incandescent. You can pay me now or pay me later. 
Its a hard sell when they can buy an incandescent downlight for $20 but have to spend $40 on a flourescent or an MR16 for $75. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
csintexas
millennium club
Joined: 06 Feb 2006
Posts: 1668
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I suppose it depends what you believe.
I think 58 recess lights are always going to be ridicules excess. Particularly in a vented attic where even the so called airtight cans are difficult to insulate and seal around. Recess lights are not a very effective way to light a space to begin with. Using ones made for CFL's is at best only a mediocre solution. I doubt they have the money to build this house well to begin with. They will probably spend an extra $3500 on electric fixtures and then cheap out on everything else to make up the difference.
I guess a huge excessive house that is energy efficient is better than one that is not but for me green is as much about simplifying and conservation of resources as much as picking the most energy efficient of any particular product.
This does illustrate how even designers can have different ideas about what is good or bad design. You probably would not appreciate it if you had asked me to design an environmentally friendly house for you and then I fired you because you wanted 60 can lights and then kept your deposit.
_________________
Chris Stewart
Modern Texas Home Project |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
phansford
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 500
Location: SW Ohio
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 6:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| csintexas wrote: | | I think 58 recess lights are always going to be ridicules excess. Particularly in a vented attic where even the so called airtight cans are difficult to insulate and seal around. Recess lights are not a very effective way to light a space to begin with. Using ones made for CFL's is at best only a mediocre solution. I doubt they have the money to build this house well to begin with. They will probably spend an extra $3500 on electric fixtures and then cheap out on everything else to make up the difference. |
Lighting design is subjective and is the definitiion of green. I am not saying their lighting request is not excess, but properly designed, they can be more efficient (and flexible) then a single fixture (with 3 or 4 incandescents lamps) placed in the center of the room. Adding (and acutally using a dimmer) change reduce the energy usage and increase lamp life - greatly on both accounts.
Either way, I'll trust the MPE's I use who are nationally recognized and LEED professionals.
| csintexas wrote: | | I guess a huge excessive house that is energy efficient is better than one that is not but for me green is as much about simplifying and conservation of resources as much as picking the most energy efficient of any particular product. |
You need to come to terms with being true to yourself and just doing work for money. The latter makes you a whore. Being true to your beliefs, regardless of the clients demand for a large house, is what should separate you from the common draftsman. If you can't bring elements of green into every project, then you have given up and you will never design a green house. So basically you are saying - hey, I can't do green on my terms, so I'll just whore myself out and do whatever anyone asks me to do. Personally - I don't think thats how you feel or how you personally want to present yourself.
| csintexas wrote: | | This does illustrate how even designers can have different ideas about what is good or bad design. You probably would not appreciate it if you had asked me to design an environmentally friendly house for you and then I fired you because you wanted 60 can lights and then kept your deposit. |
I think you are missing the point that the architect rendered services and should be compensated. If I have not worked on the project or feel I can eat the fee, we walk - otherwise the work provided has value and needs to be paid for. This is not about screwing someone because you don't want to put in 60 can lights in your green design. With your logic - anyone could hire you to provide services, then at the end decide not to construct the project (or they can't obtain financing or whatever) and therefore don't need to compensate you for your services. Our contract is very clear - you pay us whether you build or not. AND if the project is over budget because you wanted 60 can lights and you want us to revise the drawings.... guess what - that's an additional service.
You have a young firm and your experience is limited. I will take your comments and attempts to bash me at face value. I hope you never get into a situation where you have to fire a client - its not fun - there is no joy in. I have done it about 3 times in 14 years. I also did it when I worked for another firm - the client wanted me to alter my hours - then they wanted to slip me a little money on the side. I finished schematic design, invoiced them, informed the firm, and we terminated the project.
I think there are things that the original poster is not telling us. So I am not willing to believe wholesale what is being presented here as fact. There is lots of the story we aren't being told. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
csintexas
millennium club
Joined: 06 Feb 2006
Posts: 1668
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 7:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lighting design is subjective and is the definitiion of green. I am not saying their lighting request is not excess, but properly designed, they can be more efficient (and flexible) then a single fixture (with 3 or 4 incandescents lamps) placed in the center of the room. Adding (and acutally using a dimmer) change reduce the energy usage and increase lamp life - greatly on both accounts.
Either way, I'll trust the MPE's I use who are nationally recognized and LEED professionals.
LEED is so far away from the solution that we are going to need it's a joke. Americans need to drive this: http://www.theaircar.com/models.html not this: http://www.chevrolet.com/silverado/?seo=goo_silverado
We absolutely have no clue how much we consume. If we really want to live off of solar power and have a clean environment and have a planet with 6 billion or more of us than we are going to have to learn to consume less.
You need to come to terms with being true to yourself and just doing work for money. The latter makes you a whore. Being true to your beliefs, regardless of the clients demand for a large house, is what should separate you from the common draftsman. If you can't bring elements of green into every project, then you have given up and you will never design a green house. So basically you are saying - hey, I can't do green on my terms, so I'll just whore myself out and do whatever anyone asks me to do. Personally - I don't think thats how you feel or how you personally want to present yourself.
I had to come to terms with the the fact that people are selfish, greedy twits along time ago or I would of had to shot myself in the head. I guess it depends on your philosophy. I think it is better to be out here trying to make a difference than sitting on my self-righteous arse.
I think you are missing the point that the architect rendered services and should be compensated. If I have not worked on the project or feel I can eat the fee, we walk - otherwise the work provided has value and needs to be paid for. This is not about screwing someone because you don't want to put in 60 can lights in your green design. With your logic - anyone could hire you to provide services, then at the end decide not to construct the project (or they can't obtain financing or whatever) and therefore don't need to compensate you for your services. Our contract is very clear - you pay us whether you build or not. AND if the project is over budget because you wanted 60 can lights and you want us to revise the drawings.... guess what - that's an additional service.
He did not render a service. The guy asked him to design a house the architect declined. At what point should the architect have told him he wasn't interested in the job? I did get fired by a customer a few months ago because he was an asshole and I didn't want to work for him and lost a few hours of work.
_________________
Chris Stewart
Modern Texas Home Project |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yxh0300
Joined: 09 Nov 2007
Posts: 7
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 12, 2007 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Thank you guys. I think what we need is a really good architect. It is not like we insisted to have a boomerang shape. I think they really did not listen to us. Here are some examples: We wanted the master bedroom and my daughter's room to have water views, they did not take this into consideration. We wanted to have the kitchen close to the garage entrance, they did not put this into any of their plans. We wanted an open floor plan, their plans did not give us that either... You are right. The fault is on both sides. It is due to lack of communication (made more difficult by us being in a different state from the architect). They never told us what was wrong with our boomerang idea, other than to say that it's more expensive than other designs. We studied their plans very carefully (including painstakingly putting their paper plans into software so we could get a 3-D idea of what it would 'feel' like to be standing in each) and none of the plans felt as big as the boomerang shape (despite the fact that some had bigger footprints) - that is why we sent them ours again. Well, things happen. We are learning from it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
blogger
del.icio.us
digg
slashdot
