Designing your home Architects and those about to build

observer2u

I have been thinking recently about the repetivtive nature of domestic builds in ireland and also at the same time thinking about how architects get work.

What are peoples (architects/ technicans/ engineers/ those about to build/ those just finished building) opinion on the design of their homes?

Would architects be interested in getting the chance to pitch for jobs through design and would client prefer it?

i.e if you are and architect would you like the opportunity to present ideas / sketches etc. in order to get a job. It would lead to more thought and more unique design. It would also lead to better preforming buildings in my opinion.

I'm sure a client would love the chance to see how 2/3 architects / technican approach their home.

What you guys think?

sinnerboy

observer2u wrote: »

pitch for jobs through design

A real house design can only evolve through several meetings between a client and Architect . It can't be "pitched" as you suggest because that could be the worst case of all . Poor client with 3 "designs" to select from where they had no input .

What you correctly describe as the repetitive nature of domestic builds is a result of so many people failing to understand the true nature of house design and to then seek it out .

So why doesn't the client develop designs properly with more than one Architect ? That would take a lot of time - which in fairness ought to be
paid for .

Bullseye1

Don't rule out Surveyors and Engineers when it comes to design. But I really do not see this suggestion of pitching ideas working. With work so hard to come by at the moment the last thing a designer wants is to be wasting his or her time on pitching ideas and then not getting the job unless you are taking about multi million euro contracts.

LoTwan

It took 2 meetings with our engineer to come up with a sketch, a meeting with the planners to come up with another idea, another meeting with us to come up with the "final" idea and then an incorporation of the planners desires to produce the acutal design. I wouldn't have like to be presented with drawings without knowing what I actually wanted. Heck I didn't know what I wanted when we started this whole thing.

sinnerboy

LoTwan wrote: »

Heck I didn't know what I wanted when we started this whole thing.

Exactly , most don't thus we have what is called "the design process" . A two way relationship must develop which is both professional and trusting . The client and Architect have to "get" each other . It can take time , can't be "pitched"

imitation

If I were looking for an architect I would be more interested in examples of his previous work, his clients opinions on him and then maybe what his initial thoughts and suggestions would be. I would put far more weight on the first two.

What I would be looking for is somebody who is practical with there designs, who is willing to work the design into what the client wants, is knowledgeable about new technology and of course will keep the builder in line.

observer2u

fair point and i completely agree with the whole idea of it as a process "I COMPLETE BUY INTO THAT"

BUT why does every house look so similar, how come there are still people talking about "selecting from book of house designs" and people doing drawing for 399.95!!

If is it such a process - such a labour of love, teasing out an idea and allowing it to grow into this wonderful realisation of a family home, then why does the above happen? why does everything end up looking identical?

I can see why people / architects / technicans etc. are not keen on the idea of pitching ideas ESPECIALLY in this climate, but I feel architects / technicians go for the same and same again - stick to what you know and get it out quickly whereas if you had to pitch an idea - had to stand out from the crowd in order to win the job - every designer would start thinking more and we would have much more unique and better design. I recently visited a house where the "conservatory was looking north" and the south facing kitchen and one small window to the south. of course it had all the expensive and technical things like air recovery units and solar panels yet failed completely to take advance of the qualities of the sun!

Anyway mini rant over.

sinnerboy

Sadly too many people opt for the €400.00 layout and choose not to "waste" money on real design . And they can be very fixed on this view . Very very difficult to reach this market without having to rely on free cheese

observer2u wrote: »

If is it such a process - such a labour of love, teasing out an idea and allowing it to grow into this wonderful realisation of a family home, then why does the above happen?

No if , it is such . That is lost on some . They don't or wont get it . The granite worktop paid for by "saving the cost" of an Architect wins .


.

beyondpassive

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Don't rule out Surveyors and Engineers when it comes to design.

you should immediately rule them out , they have no design training.

For many good professional architects, they get work through word of mouth, their clients attest to their good work. I know from experience, that an architects fee is saved many times over due to providing detailed construction drawings/ specifications and use of contracts.

The time you really need an architect is at the construction stage as an intermediary between you and the builder. Its become especially important to have a professional on board as with higher expectations of thermal comfort and performance our buildings have become more complex.

Of course anyone who builds to a €399 planning permission set, has made a bad decision, equally there are architects out there who have not evolved to understand the major changes in domestic building practices in the last 3 years as the one off house market moves towards passive levels of comfort and efficiency.

Bitten & Hisses

IMO the proliferation of repetitive, unimaginative design is down to 2 factors:

1. Seamus public who goes to "a guy who draws plans" rather than an architect/arch tech
2. Area planners who are afraid of anything which isn't a 1700 sq ft rectangular bungalow with no design flair and a low ridge height.

I very nearly went with the "guy who draws plans" approach due to sheer ignorance on my part, but boy am I glad I didn't. We have spent a bloody fortune on Architects' fees for various aspects of the project (excluding supervision), amounting to between 4 and 5% on top of the house build cost. It has been the best money we spent and there is a tangible benefit: You can see the benefit of the knowledge and expertise these guys brought to the project, all over the house. Having someone like this on board is invaluable, especially when the area planners start throwing the toys out of the pram.