I know that there are some architects that hang out here, and also folks who know ’em and love ’em. So my question is for all y’all…
We have worked with 2 designers (not AIA certified architects) and 3 CAD guys so far on our plans and we are getting close to a final plan. We’re happy with the overall feel/style of the home, the floor plan, the features, the flow, everything. But the plans need some final tweeking…we have a staircase that I’d like an engineer to look at (or someone else qualified/experienced in stairbuilding), I’d like to see if we can’t reduce the square footage a bit (we asked for 2500′ and got 3000′), we want to infuse some “green” ideas like rainwater collection and whatever makes sense to incorporate.
So I email some area “green” architects to see if they’d be willing to consult with us to tweek the final plans. Many of them emailed back to say that they don’t like to work with others’ plans. One said they didn’t have anyone qualified to address the stair issue. One said they didn’t consult, but would consult for $150/hour. A few emailed to say “green” isn’t something you add on at the end of the process. I had one positive resonse and two that said we’d have to be willing to take a few steps back before moving forward.
I’m wondering why there is such resistance to working with others’ plans? This really seems to fly in the face of logic. Seems to me they’d want to honor the time/effort/expense that has already gone into the project and use it as a jumping off point…not ask the client to scrap everything they’ve done the past two years. And as for adding in “green” ideas…isn’t it better done late than never?
I’m a professional and I often pick up where other’s have left off…I don’t ask my clients to go back to square one to begin working with me. I think it’s disrespectful to both the client and to the other professionals that have worked on the project before I got involved. I assess the situation, determine what the goals are, what needs to be done to meet the goals, and move on from there…
Replies
I can understand not wanting to modify someboidy elses plans, especially the part about reducing from 3000 to 2500 sf ... that would/could take quite a bit of work unlkess you just want to lop off one bedroom.
But the green part ... why not? They would have an established plan to start from, now just recommend some changes/modifications/materiuals to make it greener. Same for the stairs, but that's even easier.
I'm sorry, I thought you wanted it done the right way.
I agree. So, why not say, "we'll take a look at your plans, but we want to let you know up front that we're not confident that we could help you reduce the size of the house. We can definitely help with your other concerns." Or ... "We don't really do the kind of work you're looking for, but our colleague xx might be interested and their email contact is [email protected]"
The most trite comment came from the local Arch school saying (paraphrase) "green design" is impossible to add in near the end of the planning process...you'd think they'd jump at the chance for their students to get involved in a "real world" project.
Edited 3/15/2005 9:02 am ET by pegkip
I'm not a designer, but if I was to post a reply, I'd have to say that Cloud couldn't have said what I woud have any more eloquently.
Bob
As an architect, I have to agree with CLOUD. Nicely put.
Forgive my ignorance, but what is "green architecture"? I've 5 years in architecture and never heard that term.
Green Architecture or 'Sustainable Design' is simply responsible design that attempts to mimimize its impact on nature. From this mindset, it is easy to understand it requires more than material selection upon build-out. Site placement, orientation and planning are all underlying decisions that affect how the building will impact the environment and vice-versa. There are many resources online to learn more about 'green design' that explain it in more detail than i can.
Ok, that makes sense, thanks for the crash course..................
Don't forget the "low impact" "green" design--where one is supposed to better use all resources. So, that can mean better insulation, trusses and engineered lumber, metal framing & SIPs (excepting the "greens" who rail against foam & PE glues used in OSB & ply).
Austin & it's area also benefit from a number of water "things" that are more locally "green" rather than national. Rain water collection is one. Not that Austin is terribly arid, so much as it's mostly rock, so city water mains are not oversized, and wells can be problematic to drill.Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
We don't really do the kind of work you're looking for, but our colleague xx might be interested and their email contact is
That's likely because nobody in office "A" really knows what office "B" does, to that sort of level. The email addresses also change pretty fast. On top of that, the smaller offices tend to be cliquish, they know what they do, but not what others do.
The most trite comment came from the local Arch school saying (paraphrase) "green design" is impossible to add in near the end of the planning process...you'd think they'd jump at the chance for their students to get involved in a "real world" project.
Now, I may get accused of a certain amount of predjudice, but the "local school" there is not known for its being well grounded in practical education. They are also not known for being a "green design" teaching program, either.
So, on top of dogmatic insistence that desing must be a complete process only (a problem not limited to that archy school alone), they also have the insulation of not being in the "real world."
I'm just down the road from the the other large archy school in this part of the State, and they do not "embrace" real world projects for their students. Partially, that's due to the need to plan the per-class curriculum before the semester starts (you probably would not want to wait until the end of the summer session in August to get your plans back). Partially, it's due to the way the "ontent" of a class curriculum is already set before the class meets.
Oops, sorry, ran long again. I have two recent graduates in the office here, and know people "neck deep" in the warp and weave of the educational process, and whether said process is correct or not.Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
Only read this if you really want to hear an honest answer (albeit just my own personal opinion).
The first thing I noticed was a red flag. You've worked with 2 designers and 3 CAD-ers and you still aren't satisfied and are looking for another. That means you either pick people unsuited to the task and have to bail on them, or you're difficult and they bail on you, or...??? I would be really hesitant to be next in line, just as I would be hesitant to propose to a woman with 5 previous marriages, widowed twice and divorced thrice.
Second red flag. Working with the plans of another raises all sorts of issues about copyrights, intellectual property, design credit, etc. If one isn't careful, one can get one's butt sued, though I'll defer to our resident lawyer for specifics.
There aren't many people who work with my kinda building, so I get a fair number of clients when their first set of plans didn't work out. But I usually won't take that as a starting point be/c.......they didn't work out!!!!! To be subject to the way another person sited the house, chose a style, placed critical rooms and components.....nah. Sorry, but I usually think I can do much better, and that won't happen by tweaks, nips and tucks.
Dropping a house 17% is going to mean more than just shrinking each room 17%. Sometimes it's an entire redesign, be/c the frig won't shrink, nor the toilet, nor the doors, nor the...
And lastly, I agree with their comment on green. It's not just picking brand A vs brand B. It's a holistic thing that should be considered from the start, especially 'cause it can mean different things to different people.
What field are you in? A trim carpenter needs to follow on work done by others...it's the nature of their work. But if you want a trim carpenter to finish work that's 90% done, then you're probably gonna pay through the teeth for the difficulties they'll encounter. An interior designer follows the building designer. That makes sense. But expecting one designer to follow the work of another (several others) and get a cohesive design as the result.............you're asking a lot, and I'm wondering why the initial five (FIVE!) people weren't up to the task.
Hi Cloud et al,
Thanks for your post. If I didn't want an honest opinion, I wouldn't be posting here. So I really appreciate your taking the time to respond.
Red Flag 1 - Team Designer 1/CAD guy 1 was unsuitable. He was recommended by a friend, did a good job on the floor plans, but had trouble with the exterior design. Team Designer 2/CAD guy 2 was unsuitable. The designer did a great job refining the floor plan and re-imagining the exterior. He showed up late to meetings often with a hangover, his CAD guy was an ancient specimen who didn't really understand the software he was using and we had to pay for multiple redos on the plans that seemed to stem from incompetence either on his pare or on the part of the designer. CAD guy 3 has done everything we've asked him to, and has done a good gob, but he's just a CAD guy and, as such, doesn't have the expertise we need for these final bits. Your point that we picked bad people is well taken. I agree. We should have gone with an architect from the outset. My hubby wanted to try to cut corners. He would have gone with a stock plan if it were up to him. Working with a "designer" was as as far as he was willing to compromise at that point. But now we have a set of plans that we are both largely happy with. It really is just the final tweaks. Are we difficult? Depends what your definition of "difficult" is <grin>....I'd say we are. Opinionated certainly.
Red Flag 2 - In each case we have asked for the CAD files and the work done so far, without problem and without caveat. Maybe designers aren't as proprietary about their work? We certainly didn't sign any agreements limiting our use. Standard work-for-hire arrangement.
Red Flag 3 - I am 100% certain that an architect could improve upon the plans that we have, but we are largely happy with them, and that wasn't't an option for us at the time. Besides, without looking at the plans and meeting with us, its just conjecture.
Red Flag 4 - If it's unrealistic to try to reduce the square footage at this point, so be it. But again, without looking at the plans and meeting with us, its just an educated guess.
Red flag 5 - I understand that in the ideal scenario, "green" would be factored in at the beginning of the process. In our defense, we asked for this all along. In their defense, they probably didn't have the expertise. But let me ask you this - how many scenarios are ideal? Isn't is better to be partially "green" than not "green" at all. I understand that the home may be sited badly. I understand that we probably can't add in things like strawbale, rammed earth, or SIPs at this point. But don't lots of folks install rainwater collection systems on homes that are already built? Seems like nothing is specked out yet in terms of finish yet so there's still plenty of opportunity for using "green" materials in the home. Small changes can still make a significant impact, can't they? Again something small is better than nothing at all.
Thanks again for your posting, Cloud. I am sure that these kinds of issues are the kinds of things that the profession struggles with all of the time.
I can't speak directly for architects, but as an engineer I've run into similar situations. As someone else said, liability is a big issue when working with plans that were done by someone else. "Plan stamping", where the architect/engineer simply signs off on someone else's design, is a legal and ethical problem that can get a professional fined or even stripped of their license. Now, I'm sure this isn't what you have in mind, but it's something that's always on our minds when this comes up. In a way, when I put my signature and stamp on a drawing, it's kind of like saying, "Send all the lawsuits to me." A related issue is how much money the architect is going to make...some of the people you contact may decline the job simply because they don't think they'll make enough money to make it worth their while, considering the liability they will incur. If they do take the job, they will probably want to go through everything in great detail, to make sure the design is a good one, there aren't any code violations, etc., and the size of their fee may well reflect that.It sounds like your plans are in pretty good shape and only need minor tweaks here and there, so hopefully you'll find an architect willing to finish the job.
Okay, that being said, I wonder why a designer would design a staircase for which they couldn't provide the detailed specs? Or, when presented with a client who said "I'd like to infuse some green design principals into the plans," didn't fess up that they didn't know the first thing about green design?
All bygones, I suppose.
I wasn't looking for someone to sign off on the design (do some people really do that?), I really do want input on these specific aspects of the plan and do understand that would require some compensated study and time on their part. I certainly understand that our project is not a large one and many folks don't care to focus on something with low revenue. But why not be upfront about that, too? I fully expected some folks to respond that way, actually.
Looks like I have one 'yes', and two solid 'maybes'. So it is a start anyway. I am looking forward to meeting with them and learning more....it will be nice going to the meetings with a bit more understanding of the way things might look from where they sit.
"I wasn't looking for someone to sign off on the design (do some people really do that?), I really do want input on these specific aspects of the plan and do understand that would require some compensated study and time on their part." From your posts, it's pretty clear you just want to do everything right and get a nice house in the end, but I just wanted to bring it up as something the architect may have in the back of his mind when you call. I don't think it's rampant, but surprisingly it does happen...I've been asked to do it myself more than once (and have always politely declined.) I get a quarterly newsletter from my state's engineering/architectural board, and in every issue there's a list of people who've gotten themselves in trouble for various infractions, including plan stamping. I always wonder what the heck they were thinking.
Wow...That's kinda crazy. Why take the risk on a $200k+ investment? If you're going to the trouble to locate an architect in the first place....I'd rather pay for their expertise up front than take the chance that costly design flaws show up down the road.
The stairs particularly concern me, I don't want to be partway thru building only to discover some huge and expensive problem with the way they're designed (or not designed <g>)
Unless it is customary to leave the specifics to a builder to figure out? Seems like a bad idea to me....
"The stairs particularly concern me, I don't want to be partway thru building only to discover some huge and expensive problem with the way they're designed (or not designed <g>)Unless it is customary to leave the specifics to a builder to figure out? Seems like a bad idea to me...."I'm a little out of my element on this question since I'm an electrical engineer, and this is really a question for a architect or maybe a structural engineer, but in general terms this is what I do when I design stuff: for instance, if I'm doing a lighting design for a building, my drawings and specifications will show where I want the lights, what kind they should be, what size wire to use, where the light switches should be installed, and maybe there'll be notes about a specific mounting detail or other things like that. Then, it's up to the electrician to install everything according to code and make sure it works. I'm not going to tell him how to route the wires through the walls; those sorts of things are better left for him to determine in the field.Likewise, I imagine a staircase design needs to have the general look and layout on paper, along with specific details where required, plus all the structural stuff needs to be figured out beforehand, but it's going to be up to the carpenter to figure out how to translate the pictures on the drawing into reality.When a job is going well, the engineer/architect and the craftsmen will work together on these things to figure out any problems that come up. I can't speak for others, but I know the electricians have saved my bacon more than once on projects - they'll see something at the construction site that wasn't obvious from the drawings, or know something from practical experience that I didn't pick up on, things like that.
I hope I didn't seem disrespectful to the builders in the house. I certainly didn't mean it that way at all. I understand that they use the plans as a guide but often making important adjustments along the way. But that they need a place to begin and something to base their bids on ...correct?
Stuart, Your description of what you do matches my impression of what I ought to have on paper. These stairs are not detailed one iota. No breakaway or elevations at all. No rise, nor run, nor number of treads, nor materials. No purty calculations. Not even a sketch.
I think you've got it - the plans need to have enough detail so the builder understands what it is he's supposed to build, and so he knows enough to intelligently bid the project in the first place, but he's not going to need diagrams of every single sawcut and a note itemizing the nails and calling out how much glue to use... :-) Getting your plans from where they are now, to something the contractor can actually use to build your house, is what (hopefully) the architect will be able to do for you.
"but he's not going to need diagrams of every single sawcut and a note itemizing the nails and calling out how much glue to use... :-) "
There is a plus to this... and a minus to this.
I have seen plans that had spec books so thick it doesn't fit in a 4" 3-ring binder. I have seen plans that had spec books that are shorter than a "dick & jane" book.
I prefer the 3 ring binder when bidding... and it reduces any misunderstandings when building. Some builders complain about the 3 ring binder... but I look at it as an advantage.
Plus... if the decisions are laid out in advance... my price will usually come down. Less contingent pricing.
To help out Peg... here is some advice for her.
Plan the layout and general exterior design before you meet with an architect. In general... this is simply a "conceptual phase".. and you will save a lot of time and $$ by doing this in advance. Drawings on a napkin are better than walking in with no concept. Detailed drawings, like it appears you have, are still conceptual. You still should get a complete set of engineered and architecturally designed plans.
It will cost you more on the front side... but will save you big $$ in the final analysis. I know it is a tough sale... but post a question like... "question for contractors... do detailed archy plans generally reduce your building costs?" I know what my answer is... yes. I would guesstimate that many would fall in the same boat. (BTW... you will want to look for a contractor who offers "value engineering" to his client... the process of reviewing the plans in detail after award to seek ways to cut costs and increase quality)
If you shortcut the design... you will shortcut the final project... OR you will pay for it as the project is being constructed. Simple case of "pay me now.. or pay me later".
Example. I worked with a buddy of mine to put together a quote for a house that only had 6 pages to the prints... and even those weren't complete. HE had to do the call-outs... as they were not done (think the detail of your stairs... and multiply by 15... maybe 20 depending on the complexity of design). He had to hire engineers to design and sign off on certain elements of the design. He had to spec materials that should have been detailed in the original design.
His quote... MUCH higher than it should have been... simply due to all of the running that he had to do PRIOR to being able to build the house. His cost to customer? $13k... PLUS $4k in engineer's fees. Ask any archy here what they can do for the client for an extra $17K? (LOL... watch these answers fly in!!!)
Now... would ALL of those expenses been eliminated by doing detailed plans? No.. probably not. But I would venture at least 80-85% would have been (never know for sure... but that is my guess).
So when you are speaking with your husband... remind him of the "pay me now, or pay me later" axiom. It IS a fact that SOMEONE has to detail these plans. It IS a fact that the engineer has to design (or review, or whatever) many parts of the plan. It IS a fact that an archy can actually SAVE you money if you get a good one... EVEN AFTER you have spent all of this $$ on designers and cad guys. The actual drawing is the easy part.
I cannot believe that I am defending archys... especially with all of the fights I have had with them! Buttttt, it would be tougher without them. So begrudgingly (tongue in cheek)... I give them thier dues.
Look at it this way... if the only mistake you make on this project is having a designer or cad guy not be able to deliver complete plans... that is a pretty cheap education. There are other mistakes (that a GOOD architect can help you avoid) that would be MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH more expensive.
Best of luck to you and your husband.
P.S. Just remember that cooking his favorite meal is a GREAT way to butter him up before dropping the hammer of the "straight facts" on him! LOL Besides... isn't the man the one that always gets in the last two words in any conversation with his wife.... "Yes ma'am"..? ;)
You make some good points - the more complete the engineer/archy can make the plans and specs, the less guesswork and estimating you'll have to do. If I do my job right, the contractor will have every bit of information he needs to complete the project. On the other hand, to give one example, it makes sense for me to tell the electrician what circuits go where, but let him decide the best way to run the wires from point A to point B 'cause that's what he does best. I agree that all things being equal, it is better to provide more information than is necessary than not enough.
" On the other hand, to give one example, it makes sense for me to tell the electrician what circuits go where, but let him decide the best way to run the wires from point A to point B 'cause that's what he does best. "
But then you defeat the purest form of entertainment known to man kind (or at least to a contractor)..... a sparkie biatching and moaning about the "such-n-such engineer" calling out his wire runs!!! LOLOL
I charge extra if I can't get SOME entertainment value out of the job !!
OK... back to your originally scheduled programing....
Good thread...
Yeah, those guys get real disappointed if they can't find anything to complain about... :-)
It's always in my best interest to stay on their good side. If they're happy, I'm happy.
We often use an architect to stamp our plans. Sometimes it is for a set of stock plans and sometimes it is for a set that we have designed. In our area it is required that all houses over 1500 square feet be stamped by an architect or a PE. They review the plans for code requirements, check the framing sizes to upgrade for snow loads, and do an energy audit, all for a very reasonable fee. But no redesign.
The number of areas in a typical residence that require site specific engineering is very small. HVAC, usually supplied by our plumber's supplier, trusses, supplied by the truss manufacturer. That's usually about it. I have never seen a detailed drawing of a set of stairs. Occasionally there will be a little note about the number of risers and their height, but I would never trust this but would take my measurements in the field. I have to agree with Pippin that this is one of the first areas that I scrutinize because of problems with width and head clearance issues.
If you are generally happy with your design, I would advise you to find a builder with whom you can work. He can tell you if there are problems with your stairs and he can help you with green building, at least as much as is possible at this stage. I know that we could.
>Occasionally there will be a little note about the number of risers and their height, but I would never trust this but would take my measurements in the field.That's a good point and good feedback. I am never totally certain what detail to include. I do a stairway section with measurements on my drawings, but all that has to happen is for the client to change from real t&g to a laminate or the builder to change from 3/4 ply subfloor to thicker Advantech, and the stair measurements are moot. While detailed specs CAN be put together, it's also possible that it could become a false precision.
"It sounds like your plans are in pretty good shape and only need minor tweaks here and there," You kniow - it didn't seem to me that way at all. The only indication that minor tweaks are all that are needed was that statement from pegkip.
She wants to lose 500 sq ft, chang a stair space, and add a water colection system.The space reduction speaks to itself.Many times an entiore house revolves around the staircase, it being three dimensional and encompassing two floors. The hole it creates involves structural engineering. The codes are specific as to limitations...The stairwell is one of the first things I pay attention to because it often dictates what can happen in much of the rest of the layout.H2O collection - That can involve pitch of roof, type of roof materials, space for the reservoir in a home already oversized and in need of rediction, location of structural elements...My overall impression that her statement aside, they are trying to fit more into the house than is possible, and do it on a dime when a dollar is needed.But - I was getting ready to tell her that I would probably offer to at least meet with them and do a quick review of the plans to assess their needs. I would see it as an initial meeting with any prospective mew client. It is possible that I would get bad vibes in a phone conversation and it would never get that far, or I might meet and the solution to all their problems might slap me right in the face. One never knows without trying, but I would be predisposed to believe that I would be needing to tell them that I would only be able to serve them if they would let me start from scratch.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
""It sounds like your plans are in pretty good shape and only need minor tweaks here and there," You kniow - it didn't seem to me that way at all. The only indication that minor tweaks are all that are needed was that statement from pegkip. She wants to lose 500 sq ft, chang a stair space, and add a water colection system.
The space reduction speaks to itself."
I went back and read through the entire thread, and I see what you mean. That's what I get for jumping in halfway through...
Sorry Peg, Have to agree entirely with Cloud. Keep in mind he has to be one of the most honoured green Archys in this house.
When it boils down to it, anyone who contracts design or building will always be cautious about dealing with someone who has had unsuccessful dealings with a number of designers.
Of most concern is the possibility of the client being unhappy with the bill at the end of the day when the design is finished. Even if the client is happy with what you have done, they are apt to be unhappy with what it cost. For the risk of possibly having an unhappy client for any reason at the end of the project most designers will put on a heavy upcharge.
As Cloud described to you, green building starts with placement, form fitting the location and moves on from there. Not likely your initial concept would come close to what he envisions when he views the lot. Therefore, he cannot design what he feels should be there for maximum effect and efficiency.
As a side note; I very much admire Cloud's work. If I were you, I'd pay his premium and have him start from scratch. Why not drop by his site and see what I mean.
http://www.cloudhidden.org/
L
GardenStructure.com~Build for the Art of it!
Oh gosh. Thanks. Unexpected. Unnecessary.First disclaimer, though. I'm not an architect. I admire those who've pursued that course. I'm a building designer, and wouldn't wanna confuse anyone on the legal implications therein, forthwith, and henceforth.Second, the buildings I work with are for someone committed to the look and feel. You don't wanna be ambivalent when you start down that path. I doubt pegkip's looking in that direction, and I don't want to try to sell anyone here (educate, sure; market, nah). Plus, I'm up to my eyeballs, and am partial to my current, low-maintenance (no offense meant to anyone) clients.
I agree with you that a truly green house needs to be designed that way from the beginning. But in her case, why can't someone tell her which matewrials to use or avoid so that the house is at least pale green? Maybe they have no choice as to how the house is sited. But they could use bamboo flooring, solar energy panels, certain types of insulation, etc.
I'm sorry, I thought you wanted it done the right way.
Cloud - kudoes to you and to the work that you do. Perhaps in my next life we could work together. I am squarely in your camp. But I'm not willing to give my spouse the boot because he has more conventional ideas regarding just about everything. So I'm trying to find those points where we might compromise. Quite hard to do when faced with equally uncompromising industry. Given the options of keeping the plan that we have and hoping for the best, or scraping the whole thing and starting afresh, I'll bet you can all guess which way he'll go.
>Given the options of keeping the plan that we have and hoping for the best, or scraping the whole thing and starting afreshI would never advocate that kind of change. Obviously what you have is in the direction you've wanted to go, and should keep going. I guess I'd summarize that designers, like many other professionals, aren't interchangeable pieces necessarily. They come with their own biases, styles, preferences, contacts, experiences, and it may take some searching to find the one that fits best with your current state of progress. As an analogy, imagine having a portrait painted, and then changing artist halfway through. Rhetorically, how easy will it be to find another painter who can pick up where the other left off? Gosh, that would seem difficult to me. Possible, but likely not easy.
Ahhh, put in those terms, it does make alot of sense. Good analogy, Cloud. If you have a set of illustrations drawn for a book and you want to add more for a new edition, you've got to either commission the original artist, find an artist who can match the style of the existing art, redraw all of the art, or drop your plans for new art. Otherwise the change in styles can look pretty bad in the finished publication.
I guess we can try meeting with those folks who gave a positive or even 1/2 positive reply and then go from there. In the meantime, our CAD designer is getting the files together and we'll post them to a web server for easy access (not a public website) They'll be to large to email, I think.
I'll be thinking positive thoughts....
Suggestions: Seek referrals from other folks who have used the person you choose to layout your floor plans.
Person should first visit your site in order to understand what/why you are requesting.
Provide a hard-copy list of "must-be-included's" to whomever you choose to complete your plans taking each requirement (one by one) & discuss. I found it easy to set limit of approx 2500 sq. ft. but realistically requesting what would take 3000 sq. ft. in working with a Certified Designer, who only does buildings. While he does not do interiors, he has a wealth of knowledge on structure along with a library of reference catalogs available for almost anything one could inquire about. Plus he is a storehouse of knowledge as to where one obtains this & that.
Some of "must have's" did not work out for me as I desired a front kitchen on the corner so as to overlook a nearby creek (which I might add, I may/may not have been able to see & chances are he saw this upon visiting the site?). Later, he discussed how we live, our expectations & the entrance we would be using from the garage. Now kitchen flows well with the rest of the house (great room, bedrooms, baths, mudroom, laundry, bath even though the kitchen is now on the rear). I see now it works better!
Having previously worked with this same person who gave me what I requested on windows & doors, I ended up with a few custom sizes based upon a change or two we did with the General Contractor. A costly mistake! This time we are specifying standard sizes in order to hold down costs & have agreed to discuss prior to o.k.'ing such changes.
Found your experience interesting in working with CAD folks; considered using but knew these folks may or may not understand structure. This needed knowledge came into play when changing back stairs with a landing to one that now goes straight. Chances are CAD may have not considered structure changes.
Regret I cannot address being green, but hope the above may be of some help to you.
It is definately not to late to make some green choices.Yes - if you had had green educated designers to start with it would be a greener house but you still have many many choices left to you and all of those choices could be green ones.There are over a dozen CAD programs on the market (I know - I just researched them all so I could choose one!) Some of them are compatible , some are not. Quite a few are not even compatible with their own previous versions!I do green design in California. If you would like me to look at your plans and see what can be done with them I would be happy to do so. I would be reluctant to change much - particularly since there is no way for me to visit the site. However, if any of your files are readable by me I'll give them a quick gander and get back to you with some options.- Rachel Parti
Mornin' BTers! I have the basic floorplan posted at 52862.34 See if you can't access that. This file is from August, so ther have been some changes since then (minor ones).
The most current drawing I have is from February & in .dwg format...anyone know what that is or might be able to open & view it? It is a 2MB file.
Edited 3/16/2005 9:44 am ET by pegkip
.dwg is an autocad file
Thanks for posting that link Lawrence.
Cloud, you are the man!
blueJust because you can, doesn't mean you should!
Warning! Be cautious when taking any framing advice from me. There are some in here who think I'm a hackmeister...they might be right! Of course, they might be wrong too!
Is that not the most brilliant design you've seen lately for a house blue?
40% of the heat or cooling cost too.
L
GardenStructure.com~Build for the Art of it!
We have reviewed and modified drawings prepared by others. The problems that we encounter are we need to read between the lines to see how or why something is shown on plans a certain way. Our design methods may not be the same as someone else's, both ways can be correct.
Another example are the plans purchased from catalogs. The clients expect their purchased plans are ready for construction. This is rarely the case , there are no foundation plans or other items required for compliance to local codes. To provide this information, review and approve the drawings can or should cost more than the original cost of the plans. The clients are surprised by the additional incurred costs.
We have had "concept" plans or designs developers have given to us by designers or developers. The plans sometimes look good at first glance, but when we continue to develop them there are many problems that require compromises if their plans are used. A clean sheet of paper would have been the best design solution.
When a plan is done by a few different people the original continuity or design concept gets confusing.
I'm wondering why there is such resistance to working with others' plans?
From my experience, it's because a floor plan is such an inter-connected thing. This makes it hard to "move" just one part. This is even more true when you don't know, in a visceral, near-reflexive, way the "why" of the things that are on the plan.
Say there's a hall way that 45" wide. That could be because the client wanted a place to make a gallery of all of their photographs, or of their paintings. Or, it's a pre-planned barrier-free passage. Or, that's what was "left over" after two other elements were placed at one end (or both) of that hallway (there's a neat cantilever that defiens a private patio that has no column--but only if this wall is "here" and that wall is "there" sort of thing. Or, maybe the dude drafting it just always draws the halls 45" wide. Unless you know, you can't change the hall.
So, what happens, is that you just can't pick up where the last guy left off. There's not an "audit trail," to pick a term, to follow to recreate the design process. This means that the archy is left with pretty much reworking the entire project from scratch. That leaves very little of the original drawings "left." The customer goes from having 80% finished drawings, to having paid for drawings that only 10% remains.
That can create friction. For a residential archy, that friction does not gain them more clients or work. For a commercial archy, that means spending time that could be earning money on an unhappy client (and with little business reason to push hard for client happiness).
Oh, and it does not help that there is not one single drawing standard throughout the industry. It can be a tad labor-intensive to redraw plans into the office's CAD system (you run into a certain amount of redrawing even with other cad files, assuming you can translate between them, too).
Then, on top of all that, there's the 500# gorilla that shadows everything else in the biz--liability. When the archy wet stamps the drawings, the archy is certifying that everything in the drawings is complete, and correct, and accurate to the best of his knwoledge, information and or belief, so help me, to the limits of professional liability or the memory of man runeth not to the contrary.
Getting "green" also really is a "from the get go" sort of thing. Using alternate technology will dictate all manner of things, including the foundation footprint and vice versa. Even a simpler "green" thing like going to a mooney wall for the insulating value significantly changes the plans--not a simple switch.
Yeow, this is long already, and that's only the first things I thought of.
Wow, more than one CAD language, huh? That could throw a wrench into things. But no one even asked to see if the existing files might be compatible with theirs.
It also seems like some of the other "mysteries" could be solved by chatting with the client?
These aren't stock plans. They've been custom designed from the beginning. Is it really that common that designers and architects can't trust the work done by their colleagues? Is it really that common that the work done by one designer/architect is that difficult to interpret by any other designer/architect? If so, that seems like a bad place to be in as a profession.
Again, thanks to everyone for the discussion.
Is it really that common that the work done by one designer/architect is that difficult to interpret by any other designer/architect? If so, that seems like a bad place to be in as a profession
Well, there's still some debate on whether the stepped and bent pyramids were the result of client-created, builder-created, or architect-created change orders <g> . . .
Dig into a house or two, and try to figure out why some walls T in one way and others in another, for that matter (framers can be as stubborn, or "set" in their ways as any other <g>).
I know I had one one time--there was a previous plan drawn. It "translated" 90% into AutoCAD (about twice as nicely as the previous plan). What was not translated was the room names (mostly), and there was no hard copy with room names. Said plan had some "simple" axis changes (only about 90º) to reflect the actual site the plan was to be sited upon. The master suite had this 'closet' thing appended upon it. Said space was holding up most of the realignment process for the master suite (no windows not being an option). It took a week to get the clients in to actually look at one of the original hard copies to tell us that the space was for a soaking tub that had been deleted from the design "schedule." Just not from the last drawing sent to us.
Certain things are "artifacts," too. There may be a "niche" that was part of a timber frame design, but now is just a complcation of the current stick-built design. A "plumbing/wet" wall for the now deleted second floor can "lurk" in a plan, it's need/use under obvious without the second floor.
Occupational hazard of my occupation not being around (sorry Bubba)
Thanks Cap'n! I've encountered artifacts like this in other types of software, so I understand that that can happen during conversions and the kinds of problems it can cause. Certainly requires careful editing and comparing "versions." In some cases, things CAN and do get pretty muddled....sometimes going back to the original files to compare only confuses matters more (like the bathtub that had been removed in your example)
We'll now that I know the worst case scenario, I'll at least be prepared for some of the issues that could arise. I'll meet with a few folks and see where that leads...
Hi.
It's been a very interesting thread you have here.
I'll start out by saying that Cloud was absolutely correct with his explanation. Let me add whatever limited amt I can...BTW, I notice you have not answered, it seems, the Q what profession are you in. It helps me to phrase things to a client to be able to refer to their area of understanding.re: "They've been custom designed from the beginning. Is it really that common that designers and architects can't trust the work done by their colleagues? Is it really that common that the work done by one designer/architect is that difficult to interpret by any other designer/architect?"Yes, I got into design work because the number of times I have seen porr architectrual work is infinite. My remodeling clients more often prefered my ideas and solutions to that presented or demanded by the original archies. Demand followed on that reputation for attention to detail and problem solving. But I have always had a hard tiem finding excuse for sloppy design work. It is too often an ego trip fro the designer rather than a customer satisfaction profession.it has already been stated that one cannot move one oitem in a house without moving everything much of the time. Wife calls for dinner, so more later.
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
I read this thread earlier and have tried to move on, but after the site coffee-break I can't ingnore it any longer. Piffin touched on what I am addressing, but per-usual, I really want to drive the point home. Allow me to apologize from the outset for my lack of diplomacy.
Beating up on Archs is irresponsible and unjustified. Yes, sometimes it is applicable, but so far, one hasn't been hired. You shouldn’t critisize anyone who has no seat at the table. So, EVERYONE, knock it off.
It's none of anyone’s business to reason why someone turned down work. Also, turning down work does not obligate anyone to explain one’s reasoning or refer you to another.
Regardless of how you justify what you have done, your motivation stems from lack of appriciation for what archs do. Removing 500sqft from a design, reworking a main staircase, incorporating green design are not "tweaking". They are truely the hardest part of the design process. Add to that, that it is in regards to someone else’s work, well the difficulty is increased by a factor of 63.
You have hired designers and CAD techs - 5 - and NOW, as a seemingly last resort, you are coming to the Arch's table. Why should they take you on as a client? I can think of 5 reasons why they shouldn’t.
This is a real gem - "Working with a "designer" was as as far as he was willing to compromise". What?! You mean he thought you could do the design yourselves?
"Seems to me they'd want to honor the time/effort/expense that has already gone into the project" Are you serious?! They have no investment in your project and don't know you, so please explain to me why they would even consider to "honor" your misguided efforts?
In your telling of the road you have chosen, you show no humility in your errors and are slow at inquiring about the industries SOPs and role/ value of the participants invovled. It seems you have simplisticaly compartimentalized the various phases of building a house and see no overlap or ability or interest to view the process as a continuum.
My recomendation, regardless of your continued efforts to plug ahead, is to get an education of the responsibilities of each of the participants in building a house. Then, try to see the process from each participant's perspective - owner, builder, arch/ designer, bidg inspector, bank, subcontractors, tradespersons... Then, your chances of getting what you want and enjoying the trip will be improved or at the very least possible. The road you have chosen thus far is precarious at best.
F
Mornin' Frankie:
I agree with your Personal Quote: It's better to prove ignorance by asking questions than be silent and remain forever stupid.
This is what I am in the process of doing. I admit we have made mistakes along the way, so I am trying to figure out what exactly we've done wrong and how to go best move forward from here. As an informed consumer, I feel that I can bring much more to the drafting table, as it were. Also, it is nice to have a forum where I can ask some of the hard questions that I probably wouldn't dare pose in person to an architect with whom I hope to work. Not a good way to begin a working relationship really. I knew there were architects, designers, and builders here all much more knowledgeable than I about the process. I think it is really valuable to hear everyone's perspective because the building of a house is a team endeavor.
I don't think we're the first couple to have traveled this road. I don't think we'll be the last. I could be wrong, but I think that's a big pool of potential customers to turn your back on. I appreciate your comments, Frankie, and will certainly keep them in mind as we move forward.
My "PersonalQuote" has been used by a number of BTers in response to my posts. I am going to try to add a quote that addresses humility and responsibility.You have gotten some great advice since you began posting and in a few posts you sounded more than knowledgable of certain aspects of construction. (I hope your lack of info in your Personal Page is not intended to foster this.) However you seem to be weak on tying the project together - NOT from a project management perspective, rather from a design perspective. Back in your first post/ thread, daveinnh wrote:"We hired an architect to do do "conceptual design" only- recommend you carry him/her thru final working drawings and construction visits. "Little things" like door widths (wife says 36" doors), window pane sizes, window& door opening directions, transition between flooring materials, beam location (if you're considering timber frame), aesthetics are a few items a registered architect (RA) should provide guidance on. Require exterior elevation, plan drawings (each floor), and sections thru exterior to fully illustrate intended design. All in all - their fee and experience will save you agravation and 2nd guessing - i.e. you should know it's an issue before its an issue."That was great advice. When you meet with/ interview archs keep that in mind. Another alternative is to start interviewing Design/ Build firms. Tell them the design you have is basically your homework to determining what you want and you are offering it to them as a starting point, explaining that you were not able to figure out how to incorporate blah, blah, blah. BTW - You state you want to reduce the size of the house by 500sqft. Why? Cost? Land use? Height? Mass? Footprint? Where did you come up with the 500sqft figure? Your original size was 3,000. Now that the design is 2,500 you want 2,000. Tell us your thought process.F
Personal Page - I am a creature of the worst sort, a homeowner. And, even worse, I may become part of the pestilence on current society: an owner-builder.
There's an interesting thread at 30003.1 and one from the archives at 15986.1; another at 44943.1; and this one 27264.1. See, I am doing my homework...I am also re-reading "House" by Tracy Kidder.
Based on these thread discussions, and your points in your last post, Frankie, I guess I am wondering if anyone has come across a good list of questions to ask when establishing a relationship with an architect?
Frankie, we went to the designers with a 2,500 sq ft house in mind and a budget of about $250K these were max limits. But now we have plans for a 3000 sq ft house that (based on preliminary bids) is going to cost $350K. Cost is certainly a primary consideration. Another is the size of the house...2,500' seems way generous to me, maybe even a little pretentious. 3000' is...well...embarrassing. I feel like a glutton even considering living in a house of that size. I guess it is a psychological limit I set. Land use is a lesser factor. We're building on a natural shelf on a hillside, so the footprint is somewhat dictated by the size and shape of that shelf. I want to disturb it as little as possible and conveyed this to the designers, as well.
But, based on earlier posts, it seems like this (reducing the size) is an unrealistic goal. I guess the fact that we already tried to reduce the size to the 2500' range with each of the designers we worked with is testament to the impossibility. I'll confirm this when we meet with the archs. Now I'm mostly concerned with making sure the plan is buildable, is up to code, and has the detail that the contractors need.
Pegkip, if you have a list of rooms and features you need to have, the designers may have found it impossible to reduce the size of the building 500sf. However, a skilled/creative architect or designer may be able to show you how to combine some functions into a more open floor plan. Not necessarily open as in "great room", but things like--do you really need a formal dining room? Can a home office be combined with a guest room? Can you combine two baths into one compartmentalized bath? Can a laundry room be incorporated into the bath area?
A CAD drafter may be skilled at drawing plans, but maybe not as skilled at visualizing creative ways to use space, or determining construction details for that matter.
As for your problems with stair detailing and green materials, it might have been nice for the designers to make a note on the plans, but around here it would not be at all unusual for those kinds of things to be up to the builder.
Don't let anyone here intimidate you; you seem aware of the mistakes you made and are genuinely trying to learn how the complicated roles in a construction project overlap and flow into each other. It's not the most straightforward process.
.dwg is the native format of AutoCAD, the industry standard for drafting, though it has it's problems. It can be read by many other drafting programs, but not all of them.
Good luck with the project, and please keep us posted.
Mike
Aw, ain't no thing. The thin-skinned shouldn't hang out here. Besides, I think everyone has raised good points and I appreciate they're taking the time to respond.
I agree with your first point, Mike. I really was looking forward to the give & take of working with the designers to design the house. But I often felt as we were dictating the design to them, rather than participating in a team effort. Honestly, the builder we talked with (if we don't go the owner-builder route) was much better at this than the designers were. We'd float an idea and he'd tell us if we were crazy, or if there was a better way.
I just received a response to one of my emails that I'm pretty impressed with. I'm attaching the .pdf they sent me. Had I known they would provide such a careful, thought-out response, I would have taken more care in my initial email to them!
Anyway, have you BTers heard of the red-lining process they're referring to? Is it a way to respect copyright re the original design? Have you seen this done before, and is it a good way to go considering where we are at in the process?
Edited 3/16/2005 3:04 pm ET by pegkip
Why are your posts always shouting? Can't you use the default font like the rest of us?
It is amusing to read your chatter, although it is probably more appropriately placed over on Taunton's "house chat" forum.
But your choice of font makes me want to wear earplugs when I am reading posts.
I'm sorry, Gene. I don't mean to shout. I was told by another BTer that my posts were so tiny that folks couldn't read them...is this any better?
Peg, I hadn't noticed your text to appear as shouting, so I did a simple test. Changed my "View--Text Size" from medium to large, and your font changed size but no one else's did. Gene must have his "text size" cranked up to large.
Mike
Yep.. same thing here... changed from medium to large text ... same result.
I would guess that it is a result of typing in a word processing program and cutting/pasting. No big deal... I do the same thing sometimes.
Keep typing away.
Just use the DEFAULT fonts.I skip 2/3 of your, just because they are impossible to read.I can make out one or 2 lines, but not when it is longer.
peg...
redline?
View ImageMike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
your stated goal is 2500 sf @ $100/ sf
.. this plan is so far beyond "redlining " or "tweaking" that it would be laugable if you weren't so serious...
let's see some elevations ..
and what's the prelim 2d floor look like ?
you sound like a dilletante.. first you have this unrealistic budget .. then you're going to tuscany to get your windows (http://forums.taunton.com/tp-breaktime/messages?msg=55057.1)
no wonder you keep wading thru designers and draftsmen..
you have no idea what you want ... you just want it .. and they can't deliver because you have unrealistic goals
Mike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
Edited 3/16/2005 5:42 pm ET by Mike Smith
Mike,
Is that the floor plan of the house she is speaking of?
Unless the market conditions in her area involve WAYYYYY lower pricing than we have here in Columbus... that house will not get built for 100/sq.
I'm at 15K alone in plot survey and corner sets! And the plumbing is gonna be a hefty one, compared to something with a more common orientation. And ... and .... and .... and....
Peg,
You REALLY need the services of an architect. Use this as a set of ideas for the architect to start from (only). Just cutting the number of corners ALONE will save you a lot of money. If you still want the broken-up design.. fine... the archy can come up with methods that will give you the look... but not the costly foundation that matches the "full build" of that look.
I am not trying to be harsh... just realistic. Unless the market conditions are SOOOOO different than they are here (midwest, average)... I am afraid you are setting yourself up for disappointment.
Edited 3/16/2005 6:51 pm ET by Rich from Columbus
Well then, I suppose its no wonder the bids have come in around $350K on this thing...I knew that wasn't an unreasonable price for a house of that size and complexity.Just so you all know that your time here has not been wasted and has made a difference, I talked with my hubby last night and said the house is too big, its too expensive, I think we should help build some parts of it but not take on the owner-builder role. He says he agrees. (whew)He is still is resistant to utilizing the services of an architect. He says the cost is prohibitive (10% of the project cost, right?), but he has a colleague who is building a 1600' house just over the river from us using a design-build firm. So he is going to check into that. I will check around to see if there are some design-builds in the area incorporating green building practices...I imagine that there are since this is one of the meccas of green building. Or perhaps I could ask a green architect to just visit the site and give us recommendations? I'm not quite convinced yet that I should drop the idea of a tuscan-style house, with tuscan style windows and kitchen (a la my other posts)...I'll let the numbers do the talking on that...and maybe further research will reveal some sources that are within reach. Thanks much to each of you for your advice. I'll keep you posted!
First of all, know you are not alone in your quest for a home as perfect as you can afford for you & your family. Though being a newcomer to this site, I find this thread to be most beneficial; at least I know there is someone else who is experiencing all of the problems being incurred by us. Currently we are at the point of tweaking what may be the final plan, having made numerous changes on paper, then changing again.
In the beginning, we "agreed to disagree" and we have!. While your spouse resists using archy, our thoughts on using a designer is...it is less costly to change a line on paper than to either tear out & re-do or end up living with a home we are not satisfied with.
As to the 10% fee, this is way more than we are paying a certified designer, who I might add does all the old fashioned way - no computer, sparse office & works alone. Qualified - yes; does both a lot of high-end residential plus some commercial. No advertising as work speaks for itself. Surely there must be someone in your area who is equally competent though little known publicly. Check with custom builders in your area to learn who does many plans for their customers & not just those who build row-on-row homes in a single subdivision.
Do not give up on Tuscany style - just realize there may be some give & takes along the way. Just ensure the basics (doors/windows, etc) you choose is quality. Just take your time to evaluate all of your options.
Would be interesting to know what facets of Green you are seeking - sustainable materials, siting, ventilation. Sounds another good thread but why change?
ps Fortunately we all experience a bit of dilettante when forging new ground! However you do have the good fortune for these great minds providing valuable info in this thread. A real plus!
Hi Sadie:Sounds like your spouse is a reasonable fellow. In terms of green, I'm especially concerned about siting the home and having ample protection from the sun b/c our views are W-NW. Would be nice to take advantage of the prevailing winds on our ridge (S-SW in the summer) We'll be using stained concrete floors t/o. Considering SIPs and/or rammed earth. Keep the footprint w/i the natural boundaries of the shelf we're building on to limit change to the natural terrain. Xeriscape/native landscape. Rainwater/greywater collection.But I can tell you that if any of this costs considerably more than conventional building, it will get the axe (not by me...)
I'm not certain if anyone is still monitoring this thread, but I have an update for y'all. This is from a local architect who took a quick look at the current CAD drawings for me:"Hi Peggy,
How's it going? Thanks for your email. I printed out the Cad files and took a closer look at them. What I looked for are conditions relating to the following. Overall design, individual room design, structural aspects, furniture layout, circulation, efficiency vs. cost-effectiveness, code and basic Construction Doc's. notation for easier & seamless construction.
Here are my thoughts. To me, there are several comments on each of these topics, probably too many to list in an email. There are 2 issues that I think are of major concern to you. One is the overall design and how it relates to cost efficiency. To sum it up quickly, I think this design is very expensive to build. I doubt very much you will be able to meet your budget numbers. You've got a 3000sf, 2 bedroom house!(Think resale) You have more covered porch than you'll ever need. The foundation has a lot of jogs, and you have a lot of exterior wall, both of which add a lot of cost for concrete and framing. Make sure that you have a structural engineer review these plans for structural integrity, both from a foundation aspect and superstructure. Not sure who drew these plans, but I would recommend all 6" framing below 3 story structures. The garage slab has a very high probability of cracking from the main house because the 2 " main" slabs are connected by only 6.5' of concrete. There are also many notes missing that I think would make construction a lot easier.
Secondly, in terms of design, think about furniture placement in the rooms. Make sure that all your furniture lay out the way you are expecting them too. I would lay out 1/4" scale furniture on the plan. The Living room may get cramped (consider the wetbar and walking space......also, it would be much better to have the main refrigerator closer to your Dining area, this way someone does not have to walk all the way into the Kitchen to get something from the Fridge.) Think about furniture in the Entry & Master suite. Draw in your clothes at the Wic, and you'll notice that you only have a 24" path. This will be very tight, especially with the cabinets to one side.
Anyway, I don't want to sound too negative....the problems with emails sometime :). I am trying to present these issues to you as thought-provoking critiques, so that you can improve them. There are a lot of great ideas and spaces, and I think the room relationships work well. I can tell that you have spent a lot of time working the spaces, and the layout is very livable. The CD's are buildable, but they are very simple and lack a lot of detail. I would highly recommend thinking about the plans some more before you invest 350K in them. That's a lot of money, and I always look at designing a home in the way you would invest 350K with a financial mutual fund. Do a lot of research, and make sure you're happy with everything before you proceed. With the right design, that 350K could be 550K in 3 years!
Those would be my initial comments. Peggy, please do not hesitate to call me if you have any questions. Hope all is well, Regards,
-K"We have a meeting scheduled with a design-build firm this weekend. I wonder if there is an archive somewhere for badly designed homes? Perhaps I can donate these to science? BTW, I found a free CAD viewer that you can install on a PC to view .DWG files. It’s at http://www.infograph.com/products/dwgviewer/DWGdownload1.asp
Glad to see you are moving in the right direction... and still have a sense of humor about it.
I still would recommend an archy... but a design-build will work just fine as long as you have a good one to work with.
Sorry if I was a bit harsh in my critique... but I couldn't get past all of the corners before I was convinced that you could be setting yourself up for disappointment. Better to find out now... at least you don't have all that $$ tied up in an expensive build.... just a little money in designer and cad work.
Good luck... and keep us informed.
Rich, I didn't think your post was harsh at all...facts is facts, after all.I want to go to an archy...and I think some of the design-build firms employ archy's, right? I will be certain to check their credentials. And we're not 100% set on this route yet...just 'splorin' the options.At this point I am taking the recommendation to heart to "do a lot of research" and will go back to the drawingboard, so to speak. While I am sorry to be a second-time looser in the land of home design, I am VERY happy to have asked some of the right questions to some of the right people before I was out more money and time than that already spent on the development of these plans.
peg.. sorry i called you dilletante ( sic ? )
here's my take.. crummy and shoddy builders are legion....
good builders are numereous
lousy design is rampant..
great design is rare..
me..
i just muddle thruMike Smith Rhode Island : Design / Build / Repair / Restore
Hi again.The first thing that jumped out at me from this floorplan is that it looked like the designer was told as part of a class assignment, to design a home that would add as much complexity and cost to the foundation and framing as possible All those corners and jogs will cost you. It also stood out that this house had to be for a warm dry climate. There are dead spaces on the exterior that could create drainage problems in wet climatesA little history lesson going all the way from Olde Tuscany, to nineteenth century Texas - Some reasons such jogs and corners were found in old structures:Before steel reinforced foundations and modern engineering, buttress walls and corners was one of the most common methods for stabilizing a building againsty wind and earthquake or settlement.We now build a place all at once, and finance it for thirty years. But not that long ago, it was far more common to first build a one room shack and then continue adding to itas fortune, finances, and family dictated. Regular additions to a home created irregular or asymetrical shapes. Given that understanding of the purpose or reason for many historical aspects of the Tuscan styling you are trying to emulate, perhaps you can consolidate and eliminate some corners., and save some space in the process.overall, I think I would rather red line this set of plans with a match stick than a pen, but -The "server room" What is the purpose of that? You waste the space of a long hall past it to the garage.
A portion of the pantry is deadheadeedd by the storage apparantly for the ouutside, ruight next to th eformal entry.
Conceptually, I would move the garage closer, eliminate that hallway, or reduce it, tying the garage roof and the dining bump out togthter, and place the storage in or near the garage. The dining bump might be able to move within the kitchen/living sopace slightly for space reduction.your entry appears large. No dimensions shown limit the value os some of my comments and assumptions here. That entry may be a candidate for size reduction.The bedroom at bottom of your drawing is small and has way too many doors. You waster space and limit usability there. It would not be hard to rearrange that portion of the house with that common bathroom, to save space and still make it feel larger.Your master bedroom also suffers from size, traffic flow re door locations, and its own orientation with he rest of the house. It could gail allittle size without cost via reorientation.I cannot tell what the room is between master bed and master bath. it seems overly large for a walkin closet, burt the location suggests such. If so, reduce the size of it.I can't begin to adress the stairs without seeing second story and elevations.BYW, I can't remember spending so much time on one single thread. This is a good exercise for us
Welcome to the Taunton University of Knowledge FHB Campus at Breaktime. where ... Excellence is its own reward!
It's a shame that you're still fartin' around with a half-baked program. No one on this forum stands to make a dime off your project, so we're telling you what our experience has taought us, not what we think you want to hear.
That last email from the archy that you quoted ... he raised some serious issues also.
And you're still talking about going to a design-build firm that might have an archy on board.
Why not go to that last archy and turn him loose to design a proper home? You can design-in all the grren stuff you want, and get it done right the first time.
What are you doing for money, land, and your current housing? How much money are you losing through rent payments, construction loan interest, etc? maybe it's time to get a professional set of plans and start building.
Go Red Raiders. Guns Up.
I'm sorry, I thought you wanted it done the right way.
Half-baked is right, but the hubby thinks compromise is a dirty word. The land is paid for, we own our current home, we have some funds set aside, we have a lender lined up but haven't opened a construction loan yet. So I think all is well there.I have found a few design-builds who say they have AIA architects on staff and one with a "Certified Professional Building Designer" (although I can't tell if this guy is a true design-build or not) Couldn't get anyone on the phone today, so sent out some emails to them.Would love to use that savvy archy with the great advice, but so far, the hubby won't budge.
The server room is the place where all the endruns and computers for the home automation, computer wiring, telephone, security, audio wiring, etc. converge. Since it will need its own cooling unit, the thought is that it could double as a wine cellar. There is some discussion of it here 55158.1 Talked to the hubby about it last night and he says a 6x6 room would be minimum for his needs. Plans to have all the gear on a large rack. He is going to do all the wiring and design.Thanks for the helpful ideas, Piffin. The matches are at the ready...
Edited 3/18/2005 12:32 pm ET by pegkip
Peg
I'm finding this whole thread very interesting. Some very bright minds on here.
I have nothing to add, just waiting for that kitchen! :)
Doug
Red-lining drawings refers to marking errors or changes in the drawings due to a variety of circumstances, ie: ommissions, choices in specifications, room size, asthetic...This is not only common, but an integral part of the design process. If someone is explaining this to you from the outset, they are preparing you for the fact that errors and changes occur, are natural and to be expected and that "red lining" is the mechanism architects use to address those concerns. A very good beginning.FrankiePS - Stop using "tweak" in your correspondence.F
Doh. Should have known that. We've been red-lining the plans all along to show the designers what changes we wanted made, too.
So they'll just mark up a paper copy and we bring those back to our CAD guy to incorporate. Will this also work well for something complicated like the engineering for the stairs? A hand written mark-up?
>But I often felt as we were dictating the design to them, rather than participating in a team effort.I betcha I have some clients who would say this about me. I can think of one in particular. But I also have some where I'm dragging opinions out of them. I also have some where the whole process is as smooth as silk. One of my jobs is to figure out how to work with the style each client finds most comfortable, be/c that usually yields the best results. Is it me being different with each, or is it the client whose temperament is affecting this? Is it them or is it you, or some of each? I don't doubt that you are dictating the design to them. And that's a fine style if it's effective for you. If it's not effective, then _someone's_ gotta change if you're gonna get the results you want. That's tomorrow, on the next Dr. Phil!
Well, I thought about that as I was writing that post. If you're dictating, someone is bound to take you as "dictatorial" and react ...well however they personally react in that situation. I was careful to encourage their input at several points along the way (or so I thought). And, as I said, the builder responded beautifully...tossing out ideas of his own, telling us the things that wouldn't work or that were unreasonable, and talking about instances in which a particular idea worked or did not work...
But you are right, its a two way street and we certainly had a major role to play. I just don't know to make it any more clear than "tell me if any of these ideas are stupid, too costly, or if there's a better way to do something"
The red-line process ... that's a standard process in any design office, either architectural or engineering. Similar to proofreading a newspaper before going to press.
I don't thibnk the original copyright will be affected by the proposed redlining by the subject architect, because, the way I read their proposal, they will redline the printed drawings you give them, and then it's your responsibility to take the marked-up drawings back to the person who drew them, and have the appropriate changes made.
I'm sorry, I thought you wanted it done the right way.