Rogue builders

During construction  clients commonly ask me, “Why would I need the help of an architect during construction? Can’t the builder just build from your plans?” 

This does not work, and the following photographs prove it.  These photographs show what can happen when a builder refuses to involve an architect during the construction process. This builder believed he did not need the oversight and guidance that the architect provides. Had the architect been invited to review the work regularly during construction, these problems would have been avoided. There are also additional problems not depicted in these photos of inadequate structural framing issues that are causing the house to move. This builder believes his work is high-end, high quality construction. This is not true, and consequently he is currently involved in a lawsuit to repair the work to be compliant with the requirements of the approved contract drawings. I believe these photographs speak for themselves. (Remember, this is a NEW house.)

Rough siding cut with no reglet

While trying to fix an improperly installed balcony, the builder damaged the siding. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Poor tolerances

This was a custom sized steel balcony. It could have been built to the exact dimensions needed. The builder did not send the as-built dimensions to the architect to enable the fabricator's shop drawings to be verified. Consequently, a stack of washers had to be used to fill the gap. Even worse, there is nothing behind those washers except for 1/4" thick siding. The bolt is supposed to go into solid wood blocking. That blocking was not installed behind the siding, and this balcony, siding, weather barrier, and plywood substrate will need removed and replaced, so the balcony may be properly installed.

Careless craftsmanship

Again, two wrongs don't make a right. In fixing one area, the builder cut the siding (poorly), and re-installed it. A new piece of siding should have been installed here. Or at least he could have put a reglet reveal to attempt to match the rest of the house and disguise his shitty work. (Pardon my language - I'm getting fired up while writing this). THIS IS AT THE FRONT DOOR TO A NEW MILLION DOLLAR HOUSE! IT'S THE FIRST THING YOU SEE!

Poor craftsmanship

Another result of the previous photo. 

Non-level stair treads

The builder installed the bracket improperly, and the stair tread ended up non-level, in both directions. At least he noticed it and tried to fix it. The fix was to add a shim (which is fine), but it prevented him from easily putting in the bolt needed to secure the tread in place. So he just didn't add the necessary bolt, and now the stair is quasi-safe (if there is such a thing).

Wrong concrete finish

Do you notice the sheen on the bottom tread? I do. That tread is not brushed concrete as specified like the rest of them. They were specified to be brushed concrete for safety. The builder dropped a concrete tread, it broke, and he ordered the wrong type of replacement. This happens. We all make mistakes, but two wrongs don't make a right. When you walk up these stairs, you can feel the grip of the brushed treads, and you expect it. On the bottom tread, you also expect the friction, but it's not there. Someone will slip someday.

Door threshold problem

This door threshold does not extend beyond the side of the building and leaves the weather resistant barrier exposed. This is the front door! This is what you see upon entering a million dollar house. There should have been trim to cover that area, and the door threshold should have projected beyond it for positive drainage onto the perforated grating on the balcony. Also, the builder left the blue tape for the homeowner to remove.

Threshold craftsmanship problems

This is the threshold at the main entry of a million dollar house. It was not protected during construction or securely installed. Notice the gaps between the interior and exterior. Every aspect of this is rough.

No weatherstripping at door

This is the front door. It has a high-tech ventilation system to enable air, dust, insects, rodents, and evil spirits to enter without a problem. 

Mis-cut tile

The tile was improperly cut, and now the mortar is exposed at the front entry. (Also the extra bumpout of drywall was not supposed to be there at all. The door was supposed to abut directly against the wall. The builder re-built this two times and still got it wrong.)

Scuffed column wrap

This metal column wrap at the front entry is scuffed. This happens. Construction is a messy job, and things get bumped. Perhaps try doing a paint touch up, or protect this vulnerable area at the front door, or even better - remove and replace this $50 piece.

Inadequate caulking and careless craftsmanship

This is a photo from a home in the war-torn region of Aleppo. No, this is a new home in Seattle. This connection between a window flashing and metal column wrap is not only scuffed up, but it is also not filled with caulking. The builder tried to fill it with caulking but failed. This is careless. This will leak. The framing behind these parts will get wet, rot, and potentially develop mold, mildew, and fail.

Rainwater catchment debacle

The building code requires rainwater to be caught on the property and dispersed slowly on site instead of just being directed into the sewer system. There are calculations for how much water needs to be contained. The builder did not consult with the architect on what type of catchment system to install. He just showed up with this flimsy steel box resting a few inches under ground. Besides it looking bad, it also covered the basement windows. After the architect explained that any overflowing water would seep into the basement windows, he cut openings in the steel to enable any overflow water to flow out of the container. This defeated the purpose of having the container at all. The container was required to be over two feet deep to contain the required volume of rainwater. Now that he cut the openings in this eyesore, it only holds a few inches of water. Communication is key. This should have started with a deeper hole (and shoring as needed), shop drawing approval from the architect of the steel fabricator's plans, and accountability for the outcome. This builder simply did not care, and now there is a flimsy, useless container in a hole in the ground that obstructs the side yard.

Gaps in siding

The metal siding is not touching the rest of the siding. This leaves the weather resistant barrier and wood furring strip exposed. This will rot, deteriorate, and cause more significant problems.

Missing siding

The siding was supposed to be installed in this area to cover the roof to wall connection. Also, that thin strip of vertical siding was supposed to be a wood column.

Door casing not properly attached

This liner in the door casing is not properly attached. This is an easy fix, but a builder needs a basic level of craftsmanship to notice it and accountability to followup on it.

Incorrect siding pattern

The joints in the siding pattern were supposed to be centered on the garage door. They are off-center. You can also see the wobble in the door casing on the right side of the door.

Water and electricity don't mix

According to the manufacturer's instructions, caulking is supposed to be installed here to fill the void. Water will get into this junction box and short out the circuit. This can cause a spark and a fire.

Rough craftsmanship

The edges of this siding are cut quite poorly. A sharp saw blade (intended for this material) and a straight cutting edge easily prevents these problems. The bottom of this siding panel is also flaring out which indicates it was not properly attached.

Improperly attached vent

This exhaust vent is not attached to the wall. This should be fastened with screws, caulked to prevent moisture (and insect intrusion), and a cover should be installed (to prevent rodent intrusion).

Poor workmanship

I'm not sure what to say here. This is a thin piece of siding. It is flimsy to work with, and it broke when nailing. This is tough to deal with, but it can be dealt with. This could have either been pre-drilled before nailed, or it could have been spackled prior to painting. Neither was done, and this will be an area where water leaks in, the siding gets saturated, and it will eventually fall off.

Broken siding

The builder likely dropped the siding panel when installing it or removed a nail and chipped the panel. Either way, this is someone's new house, it is a reflection of a builder's craft, and it should have been replaced. The nail pops also indicate a lack of craftsmanship.

Incorrect trim

The contract drawings stipulated a mitered wood corner condition. This enabled a seamless wood box. Instead the builder did not want to take the time to miter the corners, so he covered them with a blaring white plastic trim piece. It took a substantial amount of convincing to get the builder to paint it black to at least match the windows. He painted it blue. Sigh. The builder never credited the owner for this change in scope.

Misaligned door hardware

Notice how much higher the right door hardware is than the left? This door takes quite a bit of effort to close properly. It has the character of a hundred-year-old house, but this house is less than a hundred days old. This is the result of the builder framing the structure of the house incorrectly. Consequently, the house is moving, and this has brought this door out of alignment. The hardware has been adjusted several times, but it cannot be resolved. This area of the house will need to be reframed. Yes, all the siding and finish materials need removed, and the house needs rebuilt in this area. The problem goes beyond a misaligned door. The seismic support structure was inadequately constructed, and this is a safety hazard. The builder did not follow the plans, and he did not follow the fixes offered by the structural engineer after the problem was discovered during inspection. The builder "faked" the installation of certain hardware to pass an inspection, but the lateral structural system was not properly installed. It was later discovered that the builder did not know how to read drawings, and he had too much ego to ask for help.

Misaligned double door

This is the same problem as the previous photo. Notice the left door is lower and bulging inward. You may also notice the floor sloping downward to the right. This is a result of the improperly framed structure of the house.

Misaligned double door

This is the top of the door from the previous image. Notice the right door is higher. 

Unsquare door opening

The framing of this door was built out of square and/or has moved since the house was not built according to the structural framing plans. Notice how the bottom hinge is buried inside the drywall and the top hinge is completely outside of the drywall. Either the wall is tilted or the door is tilted. This should not happen in a new house. (This is the same problem as the previous photo).

Out of square

Which is angled - the cabinet or the wall? The angled caulk joint shows the top portion of the white cabinet is not touching the wall. I would not be surprised if the wall was built at an angle.

Poor quality cabinets

These are the high-quality custom cabinets that the builder insisted he would build in-house instead of subbing out for a cheaper lower quality alternative. The toekick was installed without care and left unfinished. It turns out the builder did not build these cabinets and did sub them out to a cheap manufacturer. The builder marked up the price of the cabinets by over 400%.

Poor quality cabinets

This is the same problem as the previous photo. The trim is also inconsistent with the previous photo.

Rough backsplash transition at window sill

This is where a backsplash meets a window sill. A tiled sill was requested here, but instead, the builder left the drywall in rough condition without any trim over the mortar.

Beam patch problem

This was a very long and very expensive beam. It had to be shipped on a train from Canada. Wood has irregularities, and that is ok. This builder patched a chip with white filler. It would have been better to leave it unpatched or to match colors. It would have been best to protect the beam during construction to prevent the chipping altogether.

Misaligned bracket

This was a custom fabricated bracket to attach a very cool (and expensive) wood column to a wood beam. The builder did not get approval of the fabricator's shop drawings from the architect. The bracket was also installed too far to the right. A tape measure would have been an effective tool in getting this installed on center. A torpedo level could have also helped install it straight, so it is not leaning to the right.

Stair stringer problem

This stair stringer was not supposed to project at an angle to the floor. It was designed to be cut vertically at the bottom of the stair. This is a tripping hazard and looks bad.

Stair stringer problem

Same issue as previous photo.

Poor stair craftsmanship

Stairs are difficult to build. There are a lot of custom parts and pieces that need careful attention - especially at the main sculptural stair at the dramatic entry to a custom home. The shop drawings for the railings were not given to the architect for approval. The holes for the screws were not filled (and they should not have been there anyway). The stain from the column leaked onto the stair tread. The stair stringer has chips. The landing is not scribed (or filled) against the column. This is a messy display of craftsmanship from a builder who claims he only does high-end custom work.

Flooring gaps

The flooring was not cut tight to the column. We requested the builder to fill it. He did it! Victory. I would expect the builder would want to do this without being asked though.

Scuffs and gaps

Here is a scuff on the metal column wrap and a gap between it and the siding. The column wrap was supposed to cover the siding gap. The weather resistant barrier is exposed, and water will leak into this area. This will cause further, more severe issues.

Misaligned column wrap

Is this column wrapped attached straight? Nope. Whats that extra hole in the decking? This is possibly acceptable in a low quality build, but that was not the case here.

Misaligned column wrap

Is this one straight? Nope. 0 for 2.

Misaligned column wrap

Is this one straight? Nope. 0 for 3. Reminder - this is new construction. There were no existing conditions to work around that would require compromise.

As you can see from these photos, it makes sense to have frequent oversight during construction. Commonly, clients attempt to save on design fees by not involving the architect during construction because they believe it is an extraneous expense. With oversight during construction, we can prevent these problems and spot them before they become bigger ones. We also come up with friendly solutions (compromises) that work for everyone's agenda. In some situations, rework is necessary, and credits back to the client are required. A solid team between a builder, architect, and client is essential to keep the communication open, so effective and efficient decisions may be made in real-time. Fixes after the fact are messy, expensive, and difficult. The builder who built the items shown here is now involved in litigation and is being held responsible for the items that he built below the standard of care that is ordinary for the industry and for items that are not built according to the drawings. This builder was negligent in seeking guidance and approvals during construction to enable a good outcome. Thorough vetting of builders is also important. In busy construction climates, lower quality builders seem to emerge since the good ones are busy, and the cost of everything is going up. Taking a step back and evaluating all possible avenues is certainly worthwhile. In this situation, the client will end up being compensated for the builder's negligence, but nothing will ever compensate for the stress and added time that this causes.

If you’d like to learn more about our design process, visit www.josharch.com/process, and if you’d like to get us started on your project with a feasibility report, please visit www.josharch.com/help

SMALL Projects with BIG expectations

As an architect, I get requests all the time from friends, family, previous clients, etc to help them out with their little remodel, addition, or feasibility to see if they should pursue a possible project. Since I love designing things and seeing them get built, I'm always happy to help where I can. I've done some really cool small projects in the past, and it's also enlightening to see projects that can be built quickly instead of a couple year turnaround. 

Although small projects are small, they are not necessarily small from a business perspective. To get to a point where the designing can actually begin, it is necessary to go through the same few steps on most all projects - regardless of the size of them. Measuring the existing building and drawing it takes the same amount of time (and expense) for a small addition as it would for a large one. It is important (and required by the building dept) to document the existing parts of a building instead of only drawing the proposed work to it. We do this work of documenting very strategically. We do not measure each and every little thing when we first start a project. This would not be prudent. At the beginning of a project, nobody really knows what the design solution will be, so it is not time well spent to measure everything in a building with 100% accuracy. In addition to taking photos and carefully filing them, we generally go around and measure the length of every door, window, and wall as quickly as possible within about an inch of accuracy. This does not account for existing walls that are not built straight, existing construction that deviates from standard practice assumptions, and any extreme level of detail which we know we will focus on anyway much later in the process IF the client decides to actually do the project. Many projects never move forward for a myriad of reasons, so it makes a ton of sense to only get a rough idea of the existing conditions and not spend too much time drawing them until everyone is certain the project will move forward. The main point here is this phase of the work to measure and draw the existing building takes the same amount of time for all projects - whether its a big project or small one, so the economy of scale gets out of whack when you proportion that time over the actual design time of a small project.

Another area where small projects share the same (large) expense as large projects is with surveys and geotechnical reports if required. In many projects, even small ones, the building department will require a survey to be completed by a licensed surveyor to document the location of the property lines, the location of the building in proximity to those property lines, and even the trees and slope of the ground. The cost of a survey or geotechnical report is the same for a small project and a large one. Consequently, this is another expense that causes the overall design fees of a small project to be out of proportion with a larger one. Even if you’re building a shed, the building department still needs to know how close to the property line it is and what percentage of the property will be covered including the shed, house, and any other items.

The process of applying for a permit is another expense that is the same for a small project and a large one. We need to fill out all the same forms, do all the same calculations, and monitor the progress of the building department's processes whether it’s a big project or small one. Again, the economy of scale is lost here when doing small projects. For some small projects, there are some abbreviated processes the building department puts into place, but this really only saves wait time and not necessarily the production time of participating in the process.

Bidding is another phase that takes architects the same amount of time on large and small projects. Once we complete our plans, we send them out to builders to get bids with specific instructions on how to provide the bid for the project. The coordination here takes the same time investment on all projects. On larger projects, a builder may have more questions, but this is somewhat negligible. Most of the questions relate to the existing building and not necessarily the proposed new parts of the project. Again, the economy of scale is lost here on small projects. It is faster, however, for a builder to provide a bid on a smaller project. The coordination time for the architect doesn’t change though.

Construction administration is the final phase that shares many of the same expenses between small projects and large projects. Sure, there are more items to review on large projects, but the time spent getting to/from a meeting, setting up a meeting, filing the notes/photos, etc are all the same time invested whether the project is large or small. (The state of Washington standard acknowledges time spent traveling 50 miles to a project site is considered a legitimate billable expense, and there is even a standard in place for longer travel.)

In conclusion, the time spent designing is really what architects get hired to do, but there's a lot of effort and due diligence required to get to that point. On a small project, there's a small amount of designing relative to the amount of other required tasks to be completed. On a large project, these other tasks get shadowed by a much more robust amount of actual design time.

When comparing the cost of design fees to the cost of construction, these facts result in a much higher percentage of design fees for a small project when compared to a large one. It is also widely accepted that renovation projects are more complicated than new construction projects and therefor have a higher fee. The state of Washington standard acknowledges that design fees for remodels carry an additional 3% of the overall cost of construction. Additionally, it is recognized that residential design work is the most complicated project type. Yes, designing homes is more complicated than schools, hospital, stadiums, and museums. Residential architecture is the brain surgery of the industry. There is simply much more detail that needs to go into a residence than is necessary in other more open and repetitive types of buildings. This website summarizes architectural fees and complexity of project types from recognized government agencies and trade organizations: http://architecturalfees.com/project-complexity/ . You will see that it is common for custom residential remodel design fees to be around 20% of the total construction cost for smaller projects, and the percentage goes down proportionally as the cost of construction gets higher.

Over the past 18 years in the architecture field, I have had 4 clients get upset with my service. They all had one thing in common: they were small projects, so they did not want to engage in the full scope of architectural services to save money (despite my warnings). When the full scope of architectural services cannot be completed, an architect cannot protect the clients' interests. Although design fees may seem high relative to the construction cost of a small project, the intention of design services is to ensure construction goes according to plan. Mess-ups in construction are much more costly than the cost of preventing them with thorough design services. Design fees are well worth the investment. Here are some additional resources that substantiate these figures:

State of Washington Guide

Washington Post

Architectural Fees Website

Royal Architectural Institute of Canada (Published by American Institute of Architects - see page 11 TIER 7, and page 30 which defines custom residential as being in the most complex tier.)

Curbed.com  

Home Advisor (scroll down to "How Much Do Architects Charge as a Percentage of a Project?")

If you’d like to learn more about our design process, visit www.josharch.com/process, and if you’d like to get us started on your project with a feasibility report, please visit www.josharch.com/help

Design Is (Educated) Trial and Error

Automobile designers come up with an idea, build it, test it, redesign it, build It again, and repeat until it's as perfect as possible. It is really a form of trial and error. Architects don't get that opportunity. We design it, and it gets built only once. We only get one chance to make it right.

Doing something abstract or cutting edge comes with risk. If we do something that hasn't been done before, we don't really know if it's going to work. We think it will. We have reasons to do it. We analyze the idea as much as possible. But, at some point, we just have to take the plunge and build new ideas and adapt as we go. This requires commitment from the architect, builder, and client to attempt innovative ideas. The client must trust their team will perform successfully based on their previous track record of ingenuity. 

This is why I find architecture so interesting. I get the opportunity to design enourmous, custom, functional sculptures for people to live in, and I get to explain how to build them to great builders. I do this all while knowing the things we are doing have not exactly been done before. We are working together to figure it out with the information and conditions available to us at that moment. It's rewarding to be part of great teams that take great pride in their work. When working with builders who are less confident, less passionate, or some combination of the two, they tend to want to build it the way they did it last time. This works when you WANT it to be exactly the way it was last time, BUT living in inspiring spaces requires innovation, so there’s some variation in our surroundings. This variation actually responds to the surroundings when the architect is truly in tune with the limitations and opportunities within any given place. We innovate to come up with the best solution for the specific scenario. No two projects are ever the same. I can confidently say this after designing hundreds of buildings. 

This innovation ranges from designing an innovative space, to pushing the boundaries to how much glass and little structure you can have, to figuring out how to insulate a wall to the maximum extent possible, and even things like figuring out how to waterproof intricate and difficult intersections between different materials.  

These challenges are very fun to envision, and they are even more rewarding to see them get built and utilized to the extent it was intended. It's so rewarding because we work so hard and only get one chance.  

If you’d like to learn more about our design process, visit www.josharch.com/process, and if you’d like to get us started on your project with a feasibility report, please visit www.josharch.com/help

Architecture of Cornwall, England

Finding inspiration can come from many sources: people, places, or things. As an architect, I get most of my inspiration from observing places and exploring different ways of doing the things I already do. This is why I regularly plan trips to areas different from Seattle where I work and live. 

Most recently I visited Cornwall which is a region in the southwest of England. It is typical of most European cities that have had to adapt its ancient infrastructure to modern technologies. As I toured through restored castles, I notice things like: how they get electrical wires to be concealed throughout walls that are built of 3' thick stone or rock. 

Not only are they retrofitting older structures, but they also have different ways of doing new things too. For example, electrical wiring and receptacles are much more advanced. Each new outlet has a switch on it. This enables you to keep things plugged in while not in use while also cutting off the electrical power to prevent "ghost loads," which is electricity that is still wasted while things are plugged in but not turned on. This accounts for up to 10% of residential electricity used. This gives us the opportunity to save power, money, and resources. This also increases safety from children playing with outlets and from power surges. This doesn't add any additional difficulty for the wiring of the outlet. 

At the kitchen, there are "kill" switches for the appliances (with labels). This allows you to totally turn off an electric oven. This keeps us safer and prevents fires. The switch is illuminated in red when the oven power is on. When finished using the oven, it was obvious to turn off the oven and to also cut off its power. This provides an extra layer of safety. 

The switches and outlets are generally just cooler too. They have many more options and finishes than the standard two choices the USA has. 

Energy conservation doesn't end with the electrical. It is also evident when looking at any newer window. The double paned glass has a much bigger space between the two panes. It's about double the standard in the USA. This reduces the amount of heat that can be transferred through the glass. This has a negligible cost difference and has no affect on the appearance. It makes no sense to me why this is not a required standard in the USA. The window manufacturers do not make their window frames to accommodate a thicker glass unit, so it will take some time before they adapt. If our energy code becomes more stringent, then the manufacturers will adapt. 

Another cool feature about the European windows is that many of the new ones have a built-in vent. It's kind of ironic. Old windows were inefficient and drafty, so they unwillingly let fresh air leak in. Newer windows are very efficient and therefor not drafty. Since we still need the flow of fresh air to keep our indoor environment from becoming stagnant and moldy, the Europeans have incorporated pop-out vent strips in their window frames to allow the windows to maintain their important thermal efficiency while also allowing a trickle of fresh air to come in and out when desired. This little innovation helps prevent newer buildings from becoming too air tight which has become a problem with our newer envelope air-sealing products consisting of advanced caulking and weather barrier wraps. 

The use of cedar was another thing I was glad to see. Cedar, in its natural weathered state, was commonly used as a decking and siding material. It looks and works great. Cornwall has the same climate as Seattle except a little rainier. Builders always complain about the maintenance wood requires, but I think this is false. Wood only requires maintenance if you want it to look new. If you are ok with the look of weathered wood, then it requires no maintenance. Cedar is a native species to Seattle, so it should be used in its natural state. 

Working with native material in the natural setting is a common theme throughout Europe and also evident in Cornwall. One notable village was Polperro which was built before than the 1300's! Many of the original structures are still in tact. Nestled along the banks of a small cove between two rocky, tree-covered hills, this fishing settlement was built to contour the topography of the area and has a similar appearance to Venice, Italy - but replace the canals with a river. They even have a stone jetty with an operable wood gate that can close off the port during foul weather. The homes are built from the rock that is indigenous to the area and covered with cement. The roofs and trims are also built with native tree species. They stagger around the port, along the river, and up the hillsides bearing upon natural subterranean rock. The natural setting and materials surely have stood the test of time and add to the charm of this beautiful village. (Also, the Crumplehorn Pub was an amazing site with its authentic posts and beams from hundreds of years ago and ales naturally cooled in its cellar.)

Another notable feature of this area is its pristine farmlands outside the villages. Somehow an island as small as England, but with a huge population, has not given in to urban sprawl. The villages remain dense and walkable, and the areas outside the towns are uncompromised farmlands. Each town tends to have a "car park" where visitors can leave their car while walking around and enjoying the local pubs, shops, and other attractions. This promotes a healthier way of life. Walking around town, no car, no pollution, and more density all equates to less "stuff." The people who live in these areas seem to be more thoughtful in the things they choose to own and have more of a focus on experiences over possessions. This way of life enhances person-to-person contact contributing to the sense of community and creates the synergy that is lacking in suburbs with homes spread apart.

The development that does occur in these areas also tends to be more thoughtful. The modern architecture is a bit more striking. Although the modern materials do not "fit" within the context of the medieval materials, it is more iconic than a lot of the modern boxes being built in the USA. The problem with the traditional English architecture we normally envisions is it is extremely cost-prohibitive in terms of labor. Those castles are beautiful with their carefully carved stonework, but those took hundreds of years to build and had much lower standards for working conditions. Today, we treat our craftsmen with more respect, we have lower taxation, and this leads to less prominent architecture. To build at this level with today's labor and code regulations would be simply too intense for even the wealthiest clients to justify. This, in part, contributes to the alternative of using modern building materials that contrast the medieval construction methods and materials. As a result, it is important to design modern structures that are equally as striking as their older counterparts.

If you’d like to learn more about our design process, visit www.josharch.com/process, and if you’d like to get us started on your project with a feasibility report, please visit www.josharch.com/help

It Ain't Easy Being a Builder

Since I have experience building just about everything, I can commiserate with builders as an architect. They have a TOUGH job. They have to actually build the stuff architects draw with a level of craftsmanship our clients will accept. As an architect, I only have to draw lines on a paper. Sure those lines can be complicated to figure out at times, but we get to sit at a heated, dry, cozy desk and draw those lines while a builder has to be out on a cold, muddy, rainy jobsite trying to figure out how to properly build those lines that architects drew.

Most of the time, the lines architects draw are not even completely figured out yet, and the builder still has to figure out how to build them properly. We also prefer to empower the builder to offer input on these items where appropriate since the person building the project is the one who truly knows best when it comes to methods of construction to achieve the design intent. It's also not possible to completely figure out how something should be built during the design phase since all of the concealed existing conditions, client decisions, code interpretations from the building department, pricing from the builder, and exact specifations are unknown at the time the plans are drawn. Much of that is left to be discovered during construction, and the architect and builder are left to figure it out at that time. All too often, the builder expects the architect to know these things ahead of time (a year in advance) when the plans were drawn. 

Since it's impossible to foresee all these conditions, the builder gets stuck reacting to the as-built conditions and trying to incorporate the intent of the drawings as closely as possible. This is rather difficult because the builder rarely knows the design intent. How could the builder? The architect invented it with the client's feedback over months and months of meetings, iterations, changes, and more changes. It's a moving target, and the builder is the only one who eventually holds the target in one place and takes a "shot" hoping the thing they build aligns with their interpretation of the design intent ambiguously portrayed in the drawings.

The best builders don't take long shots at moving targets. They understand the architect knows the big goal, so they take baby steps and ask lots of questions and provide further clarification to the architect about existing as-built conditions to get more feedback which only moves the target closer and makes it easier to hit it. The bad builders are the ones who don't ask questions and just build something. This is like closing your eyes and shooting at a target hoping you will hit it. This is a guess at the client's goals. There's a low likelihood of guessing right, so the failure rate is high. It's best to take the time to ask, get approvals, and build exactly what the client actually wants on the first try. (Ask where the target is before shooting at it).

Once builders get the appropriate feedback, they have even more challenges. They need to order materials and hope they are not discontinued from a year earlier when they were specified. They also hope the materials are not on backorder and can be delivered on time. They also need to make sure their staff is available to work when the materials are delivered to keep the project moving forward (and to prevent their business from remaining stagnant).  They also hope the weather cooperates. The right moisture level, temperature, and sunlight can be critical factors in installing many products. Builders also need to make sure they have the appropriate tools, the right sized drill bit, the battery charger for their drill, a long enough extension cord, the tube of caulk, etc. The absence of any one of these things throws everything off, requires a Home Depot run, and pushes progress behind.

The builder also needs to ensure they are being paid on time, so they can afford to buy all these materials on the client's behalf. Getting paid is also reliant on the quality of the workmanship. This is the hardest part. If there's one scratch, one misalignment, one wrong color selection, one thing the client doesn't accept, the client won't pay. This puts a lot of pressure on the builder to build exactly what the client wants.

Good craftsmanship is not easy. It takes tons of patience, dedication, time, and focus to pull off a perfectly built project. Most of the materials builders work with are expensive. One wrong cut or chipped corner has a huge financial impact.

The best builders out there take so much pride in their work, and this is why I have so much respect for them. It's a hard job, and they are the final step in bringing a client's dream into reality. It all rests on the builder's shoulders. 

I'm sure you know some builders. Take the time to encourage them. Let them know you appreciate their dedication, their backbreaking effort, their patience, and their sleepless nights planning for the next day on the job. They dig holes for you. They walk on slippery dangerous roofs for you. Think about it...You're sitting in a room right now. Who made that wall so flat? Who prevented water from leaking through that window? Who attached every single one of those floor boards together? Who cut that drywall, hung it, plastered the seams, sanded it, plastered it again, sanded it again, primed it, painted it, and painted it again? Someone did all of those steps for your enjoyment. Please thank your builders. They built the world we live in.  

If you’d like to learn more about our design process, visit www.josharch.com/process, and if you’d like to get us started on your project with a feasibility report, please visit www.josharch.com/help

Our World With Self Driving Cars

Autopilot is a very exciting topic to me because it WILL change the way we live on a scale much more grand than we have ever experienced. Smart phones and the internet have drastically changed the way and speed in which we access information and communicate with one another. Although this has been a huge change, the internet and cell phones have really not done much to change the basic ways in which we live. We still do all the same things we used to do before cell phones, but now we just communicate and query for information more frequently. Other than that, we fundamentally do the same things we used to do, but we just do them electronically. The biggest change this may have enabled is the fact that we can do more things remotely. There is less of a requirement of being in a certain location. This flexibility of accomplishing more tasks from any given place paired with autonomous driving vehicles will be the combo that will truly redefine the way we live. 

As more jobs can be "work from home" and more shopping is done online, there is less and less of a demand for us to drive. Also with drone delivery and 3D printing of products at home (yes, someday soon you will print your own Amazon purchase on your home 3D printer), the demand for driving is even further diminished. This creates less of a demand to really own a vehicle for some people. Currently, car sharing services such as Car2Go and Reach Now already serve this need. In populated areas, it is becoming easier to borrow a car than to own one. For a pay-by-the-minute rate, a city dweller can easily drive a borrowed brand new car without the hassle of making car payments, insurance payments, paying for gas (or even filling up with gas at all), paying for maintenance, paying for parking, etc. The only downside of this is you can't leave stuff in the car for later - you have to bring everything with you. Other than that, the car sharing services are very easy and cost effective when compared to buying and maintaining your own car since they are literally scattered all over cities ready for you to jump in and jump out with minimal planning. 

Autonomous vehicles will change this dynamic even more. Instead of using an app to find a car (or your own car), you will use an app for your car (or a shared car) to find you. A car could be summoned to pick you up at any time or place. Teslas already have a "summon" feature that will open your garage door (then close it), pick you up at your door, and start driving you to your destination. This technology already exists. Once it becomes more prominent, people will realize there is no need to have your own car just sitting in a parking space while you are sitting in your office or at home watching Netflix. You could rent out your self driving car during the day while you are working as it taxis other people on its own and earns you money. Or you could forego owning a car altogether and reserve one to pick you up and drop you off. You could also elect to share rides with other people along your same route. This is already an option with Uber which enables you to travel at a reduced fare by sharing your ride with random people (like a bus). 

Once the technology is perfected and all vehicles are autonomous, the real change begins. There will be no more drunk driving. No more texting and driving. No more traffic fatalities. No more need for auto insurance. No real need for street signs, stop lights, or no parking zone signs. There will be no need for stopping at all. Cars will automatically regulate themselves and will not need to stop for one another - only pedestrians. No more traffic tickets. No more parking tickets. No more speeding tickets. No more traffic cops. Yes!!!! There will be no more traffic jams. With the reduced number of vehicles and a database of everyones' travel plans, a logarithm will determine the fastest routes for everyone simultaneously. No more idiot driver in front of you doing 25 in a 45 or 45 in a 25. No more road rage. With less cars, we will need less lanes. Maybe even less pavement since streets only need to be under the tires. No more delivery drivers. No more taxi drivers. No more agricultural tractor, plow, or combine drivers. A lot of farming could be completely automated. 

The automation of movement causes less stress, creates more efficiency, and this provides for better opportunity. When we have more time available, we can live more fulfilling lives. We can focus on being people again. We can talk to one another while in the car. We can accomplish things while in the car. Everyone will always have access to a car. Kids will always have a ride to their practice. No license needed - just parents' permission.

Travel time will not be a factor. This will change the size of cities. It will be possible to  travel accross the country while sleeping, eating, working, or watching a movie while "driving." 

Autonomous vehicles are likely to be electric powered. This will cause another revolution. The current problem with electricity production is the fact that electricity cannot be stored unless you have a battery. Batteries are expensive. The power company must make more power than what is needed since it cannot be stored effectively. This means a lot of energy is wasted. Electric cars all have batteries. While these cars are sitting, they are plugged in to charge. With millions of electric cars plugged into the grid, we now have the batteries necessary to store excess energy. Excess energy can be stored in our cars, and our cars can also provide energy back into the grid when demand is high but the car is not needed. Cars will be mobile power stations that store the power created by the power company. With all of this battery power, the power company may run more efficiently and create the exact amount of power needed with minimal waste. This saves coal. This reduces the need for more nuclear power plants, more wind turbines, more solar panels, and more hydroelectric dams. This all reduces the impact on our environment. This makes it possible for all energy to be renewable and to greatly diminish our dependence on oil while reducing pollution. 

Electric cars, autonomous driving, and smart phones will all work together to actually simplify our lives and protect our environment. Many of us will not need to go to work or to the store like we used to. This will be greatly reduced. We will visit one another. We will go places together. We will enjoy each others' company. This will be an exciting time to be part of. I strongly believe my kids will never need to drive a car, and I will sleep better knowing this is one less thing for me to worry about. Will I be able to draw while "driving?"

Here's a great article on the topic:  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0

Tesla is changing the electric grid - CNET

https://apple.news/AjLGIodBFQF-r7vOZB4jwUA

If you’d like to learn more about our design process, visit www.josharch.com/process, and if you’d like to get us started on your project with a feasibility report, please visit www.josharch.com/help

Why our initial consultations are not free

Here's why we charge a fee to do an initial consultation:

REASON 1: I provide valuable deliverables for your project that you will use even if you do not hire me. Prior to meeting with you, I spend around 4 hours preparing an approximate 100 page long feasibility for your specific project. I research your permit history. I determine your property's size and any environmental conditional impacting it. I analyse your neighborhood. I compare all of these factors to the applicable portions (of very complex) land use code considerations to determine the requirements impacting your upcoming project for things like setbacks from property lines, maximum lot coverage, and height limits to name a few. (These things are not really very enjoyable to do, by the way. Designing the actual building is the fun part!) This enables me to have a productive meeting with you where we can talk about factual data relating to your project (rather than speculating on it). This takes specialized knowledge and experience to prepare, time to collect/analyse/discuss, and is therefor worth something for you. Not just anyone can do this, successfully. My clients find great value in the professional services I offer. This meeting will leave you with valuable advice for how you could best spend thousands or millions of dollars on your upcoming project. 

REASON 2: I have very little value or advice to add at an initial consultation meeting unless I spend significant time to prepare a feasibility report ahead of time including the items listed above (and more). It is a waste of your time to have an ill-prepared professional on site with little advice to add. Instead of saying, “you MIGHT be able to this”, I would rather have the preparation to be able to say, “yes, you CAN do this”, or “no you CANNOT do this” at a meeting. That is really the point of the meeting, right? Also, this is the #1 ways architects get sued: by advising people on what they can or can’t do. A feasibility report is necessary to outline the facts to present at an initial consult, and we do charge a fee to do it.

REASON 3: I work for a modest living and need to be paid for my efforts just like anyone else. In my line of work, I get paid by the hour as it directly relates to my time spent preparing professional advice on your behalf. If I'm not working for you or someone else, I am not earning an income. I get several inquiries for new projects daily (fortunately), and it would not be sustainable for a small business owner to drive around to several potential clients' properties every day without being compensated accordingly. This is similar to your expectation with a dentist or even a car salesman. You would not expect a potential dentist to come to your home to meet with you to see if he or she would be a good fit to clean your teeth. You also would not expect a car salesman or store clerk from Nordstroms to bring a car or shirt to your home for you to decide whether or not to buy it. Just as your time is limited and very precious, mine is equally just as valuable. 

REASON 4: It would be unfair to my current clients if I gave free assistance to you but not to them. My hourly rates are set on the assumption that I can be a productive worker for a pre-determined amount of time each day, so I may earn enough money to support my family while covering the overhead expenses of running a professional service company subject to several regulatory agencies and insurance liabilities. If I spend time that does not relate to actual clients' projects, that time is just another overhead expense which only makes my hourly rate higher. I want my hourly rate to be as low as possible to provide a fair service to my paying clients. One could argue that doing "sales calls" is part of the "cost of doing business," but minimizing extraneous non-project related activities is prudent in minimizing hourly rates. 

REASON 5: I used to do free consultations, and only 5% of those potential clients ever built a project at all. I have learned that folks unwilling to pay an architect for a consultation are not typically serious about doing their project and do not value the service anyway. Since I have started charging a fee for initial consultations, 100% of the potential clients I have met have actually proceeded with building their project (and every one of those clients, except for 3 instances in the past 10 years since writing this, have actually hired me to be their architect). One could clearly see how this dramatically reduces my overhead expenses since my time can be more focused on my current clients who do pay me for my time. 

REASON 6: I'm generally pretty fun to be around, so why wouldn't you want to pay for that opportunity...just kidding.

In summary, everyone's time is very precious. If I'm not doing project related work during the day as a result of time spent on unpaid consultations, this means I have to work late in the evenings to catch up. At times that is necessary in any job, but it is important to balance work and life, so we may enjoy time with our family and friends when we are not working to support them. I have learned that working late directly causes me to hire a babysitter and see my kids less, so paid consultations are quite important for this work-life balance. There are likely architects out there that are willing to do free consultations in exchange for higher overhead expenses (and likely less information to present at the consultation), but I prefer to be more open and direct in my approach while offering a thorough and tangible service in every interaction on a project - including the initial consultation. 

If you’d like to learn more about our design process, visit www.josharch.com/process, and if you’d like to get us started on your project with a feasibility report, please visit www.josharch.com/help

A Game of Telephone

Remember that game you played as a kid where you whisper something in your friend's ear, then they whisper to the next kid, and so on, and 10 kids later the original message got hilariously messed up? This is pretty much how construction works. Here's why: 

The client decides to build something and tries to explain their desires to their architect. The architect comes up with a concept to hopefully represent the client's goals. The client doesn't quite understand the typical architect's technical drawings, so there's a lot of info that doesn't get communicated successfully back to the client to ensure it meets the goals. 

Next the architect sends these drawings to builders for pricing. The builders are all really busy and never sure if they will get picked to be THE builder. They also typically do not get paid to provide an estimate. So, they don't read the drawings all that carefully and usually throw out a largely uninformed estimate since they don't want to get too invested in something they are not yet getting paid to do. 

Once the builder gets selected, they need to quickly start building the project, and they barely have time to look into the details and understand the real goals of what the client is really trying to achieve (through the eyes of the architect). It's quite common to be halfway through construction and realize a builder never actually read most of the drawings which communicate exactly what the client wants. Instead, all too often, the builders have only read into the floor plan and elevation drawings which only explain the "big picture" and none of the details like trim, windows, siding patterns, materials, etc. This is ignored partially because the builder knows they are just going to hire a subcontractor to build those details anyway. 

So here's where the breakdown occurs. The architect interprets the client's goals into drawings. The architect hands these technical drawings over to a builder. That builder is a general contractor who gives these drawings to their employee - usually the site superintendent who is privy to NONE of the previous conversations, discussions, emails, decisions, and drawings that have been developed and approved over the past year or two between the architect and client. This site superintendent, who is an expert in construction, is now responsible for interpreting the client's vision into reality from technical drawings which were just handed to him on a rainy, muddy jobsite while being bombarded with emails and phone calls from material suppliers and subcontractors which he must hire, schedule, and coordinate to build whatever might be depicted in the drawings. Needless to say, the site superintendent never really has an opportunity to read deeply into the drawings which are the contract for construction. The site superintendent is also a different breed. This is a hands-on guy who is tasked with building the stuff in the plans as quickly and cheaply as possible. They look for ways to cut corners while also maintaining quality (if that's even possible). They also don't care much about design. They just want to know how many square feet of THIS needs to get nailed to THAT and make sure it doesn't leak. Other than ordering materials and putting them together, they really don't care about the client's vision or even have the information to do so. 

This brings us to the next miscommunication in the game of telephone. The site superintendent hires subcontractors to build various parts of the scope of work. The site super (or the "soop" as many call him) must now communicate the project goals to the subcontractor (called the "sub"). This communication usually merely consists of the site super emailing the plans to the sub. Once the sub receives these plans, he MIGHT read them and even more rarely, may actually print them to share them with his employees who will be performing the actual labor. These hardworking guys are truly a different breed than the client and typical architect. They are tasked with building what their boss tells them with predetermined start times, break times, and quitting times. They work and go home. They don't care about the client's vision or even realize there is a client or a vision. These are the guys building the "vision." Their boss gets a set of plans with 50 or so pages, and they try to find the actual pages that pertain to their specialty such as the siding or the plumbing, for example. When reading the plans, they don't read the whole set. They just try to find the pages they believe pertain to them, and they believe they know what needs to be done. During construction, they commonly find out they missed the more detailed drawings on other pages of the 50 page set of plans which they failed to find earlier.

This is where construction mistakes occur. You hear about construction errors all the time. This is why most of them happen: the person performing the work has not been informed as to what they are supposed to really be doing. So, they just build it "the way it was done last time" and assume that's the way it's supposed to be done this time. 

When these errors occur, how can they be resolved? It's tough, and here's why: The architect, who knows everything about the drawings, spots the flaws first. The architect informs the client to see whether the client is concerned (or to tell the client they NEED to be concerned). The client authorizes action. The architect informs the general contractor of the error. The general contractor tries to sweet talk around it. If the general is unsuccessful, he informs the subcontractor of the error. The sub complains that nobody told them what to build exactly. The architect interjects, "it's right here in the plans. They did their bid based on these plans. You did give your sub our plans I hope?" Then the sub and general contractor discuss in private for awhile to complain about the architect and decide if they are really at fault. The general will tell the sub he should have read the drawings more clearly and will try to convince the sub to fix it. The general must be careful because this is the same subcontractor he uses on every job, so he doesn't want to piss him off and cause him to raise his prices on the next job or hassle him with future scheduling issues on the next job. In the mean time, the general contractor's site superintendent is wondering when someone will just tell them when it will get fixed, so he can schedule the next subcontractor and finish the subsequent phase of the job. The architect must be diligent in spotting the errors and coming up with solutions to solve them. Often times, this requires the architect to come up with a new plan based on the current conditions since it may not be effective to rebuild certain parts of the work. 

As described, this "game of telephone" from the client to the laborer, who works for the subcontractor, results in errors due to the miscommunications that are all too common.

The best way to prevent the errors would be better communication. This could come in two forms: more clear drawings and/or more discussions with the laborers performing the work. We are always trying to make drawings more easy to understand through 3D software and other creative presentation methods. The subs do have to be willing to read the drawings though. Unfortunately, it is not actually possible for the architect to discuss the drawings with the subcontractor or his laborers. The architect does not have any access to these people. The general contractor hires them, and they show up when the site superintendent schedules them. The general contractor would have to arrange meetings with the subcontractor and architect before the start of the job to discuss the particulars of the job that relate to their actual scope of work, but the laborers are busy working on other jobs at that time. This is really the job of the general contractor to have these discussions with the subs before they commence their scope of work, but the general contractors usually don't "get it" in the first place. They just want their sub to get it done since they are technically hiring the sub to make it happen. It's also common language in the general contractor's construction contract that the client is not allowed to communicate with the subs and must only communicate directly with the general contractor. Since the architect is the representative of the client, the architect is therefore not supposed to talk to the subs. 

I don't care about that clause in the contract, and I never have followed it. I understand it can cause undocumented conversations, but the reality is that certain communications and understanding just need to happen. I understand when that level of efficiency is lacking, and I do what it takes to ensure the success of the project. My construction experience enables me to relate to the laborers and speak their language (I'm actually getting pretty good at speaking Spanish too since many of the laborers are from Mexico). I've developed some great relationships with laborers, and now they are actually interested in supporting me and understanding the vision. This is how it comes full circle and the vision is more clear to everyone. 

If you’d like to learn more about our design process, visit www.josharch.com/process, and if you’d like to get us started on your project with a feasibility report, please visit www.josharch.com/help