clients sketching before meeting architect

sydthebeat

(as a result of this thread and this thread ive started this discussion)



I am always surprised at the processes clients make when procuring a house design.

Why do you think that the best way to communicate your wishes to your architect is by trying to design the dwelling yourself?

Is there a fear that either you would not be able to communicate the brief through spoken word or through a written 'wish list' ?
Do you want the architect to design the house or simply draw up your design?

I am genuinely interested in the though process here as i am seeing it more often in my work.

Are architects now viewed with some kind of unease or scepticism in regard to their design abilities? or is there a fear that they will come back with a design thats outside the brief?

i have found that when a client goes to the bother of trying to design the dwelling them self, they find it very hard to break away from what they have sketched, regardless of its suitability or workability.

john_cappa

sydthebeat wrote: »

i have found that when a client goes to the bother of trying to design the dwelling them self, they find it very hard to break away from what they have sketched, regardless of its suitability or workability.

You called?

sydthebeat

no john, im not speaking specifically of you at all.... im talking about both posters here and clients i meet in 'real life'

i dont want to risk taking this off topic so ill create a new thread with it.. id really apreciate some input from you and others john

john_cappa

I think it is a number of factors.....

1) People from a rural area, used to "rural" designs, view anything different to the traditional "farm house" design with suspicion. Hence try and lead the design.

2) Fear of architect coming up with "crazy" designs that you cannot afford to build simply because the architect wishes to make the property an expression of their own character or similar (horror stores like this are common).

sydthebeat

john_cappa wrote: »

I think it is a number of factors.....

1) People from a rural area, used to "rural" designs, view anything different to the traditional "farm house" design with suspicion. Hence try and lead the design.

2) Fear of architect coming up with "crazy" designs that you cannot afford to build simply because the architect wishes to make the property an expression of their own character or similar (horror stores like this are common).

thanks john.


1. unfortunately what was considered the 'traditional farm house' is now viewed as this ...... the cork rural guide has an excellent chapter about how rural houses how grown out of proportion, and how use of non 'traditional' features have now become commonplace.. .such as box eaves, Georgian bars, quoins etc. The client may see this form as a 'farm house' when its not.

2. interesting..... surely the brief would include what the clients maximum budget and any architect whos design costs in excess of what the client can pay is not carrying out their duties professionally (and actually would be the sign of a bad architect in my opinion). I guess some clients view anything not bland as being "crazy"?

is this crazy

or

is this crazy

which do you think is architect designed ??

john_cappa

A fairly leading question. Obviously I would see the second one as a little more crazy and prob costs a fortune to build! Reality is the simplicity of the roof prob makes it cheaper!

sydthebeat

if you see the second design as more 'crazy' than the first then im afraid ill bow out of trying to argue with you on this issue

we see things very differentially John... makes the world go round i guess

john_cappa

sydthebeat wrote: »

if you see the second design as more 'crazy' than the first then im afraid ill bow out of trying to argue with you on this issue

we see things very differentially John... makes the world go round i guess

Trying to break a mind set is not easy. My eyes have been open to a degree in the last few days. I can imagine living in the second house to be lovely and "airy" filled with light etc.

Where my site is for example there is no nearby house bar one. An old old farm house with 2 foot walls lol.

Would you really get planning for something like the second house above? given what the house next door looks like?

Poor Uncle Tom

sydthebeat wrote: »

(as a result of this thread and this thread ive started this discussion)



I am always surprised at the processes clients make when procuring a house design.

Why do you think that the best way to communicate your wishes to your architect is by trying to design the dwelling yourself?

Is there a fear that either you would not be able to communicate the brief through spoken word or through a written 'wish list' ?
Do you want the architect to design the house or simply draw up your design?

I am genuinely interested in the though process here as i am seeing it more often in my work.

Are architects now viewed with some kind of unease or scepticism in regard to their design abilities? or is there a fear that they will come back with a design thats outside the brief?

i have found that when a client goes to the bother of trying to design the dwelling them self, they find it very hard to break away from what they have sketched, regardless of its suitability or workability.

I think the average couple going about designing and building today are so far removed from a couple building say 20 years ago. Everyone has access to drawing packages and basic sketch programming. All the TV emphasis on building design and the different elements brought together to make a good living environment has just heightened peoples awareness of design. It is only natural that people would like to have a strong hand in, or attempt to have a design influence in, the building they intend to live in. It's up to the Architect or Architectural Technician to guide that to its well designed and budgeted conclusion.

sydthebeat

i suppose part of the point of my selection of the second house was to show how a house can work in the context of the site its on.

a house should be designed to suit your site too... and especially designed due to your requirement to have a granny flat type annex.


but we digress, we can chat about your design over on your thread....

here id like to know why clients would decide to try to design the dwelling themselves before meeting the professional who is paid and trained to design ???

when you first though about how to put your requirements over to your archtitect... why was sketching a plan the first thing that came to your head and not writing down what you want?

woody1

sydthebeat wrote: »

i have found that when a client goes to the bother of trying to design the dwelling them self, they find it very hard to break away from what they have sketched, regardless of its suitability or workability.

ive been out of the loop for a while now but from past experience i would agree with the sentiment of this, once people have an idea in their head its hard to budge it, BUT i always found the ones that gave a completely free hand worse to deal with, they had no idea what they wanted and let you off to design whatever only to come back after planning was granted and the building was on site and start to change the whole thing... ( post boom there are probably a lot less of these now )
if you can slowly get the clients that are set in their ways around to your way of thinking , even a small bit, in the very long term i think their easier to deal with

and yes people dont trust architects to design anything other than a monument to themselves, not helped by certain design programmes where architects come off as a little bit precious..

john-cappa there are a million ways to design something both contemporary ( different to a lot of whats out there at the moment ) and fitting ... without reverting to what some people would call crazy or going with bungalow blitz either and staying at the same budget,

cruizer101

I think most people would see the second as more 'crazy' as its non traditional. It could well be, and probably is, a much more sensible design in many ways, but its about what we are used to.

sydthebeat

Poor Uncle Tom wrote: »

I think the average couple going about designing and building today are so far removed from a couple building say 20 years ago. Everyone has access to drawing packages and basic sketch programming. All the TV emphasis on building design and the different elements brought together to make a good living environment has just heightened peoples awareness of design. It is only natural that people would like to have a strong hand in, or attempt to have a design influence in, the building they intend to live in. It's up to the Architect or Architectural Technician to guide that to its well designed and budgeted conclusion.

i fully accept and agree that the client should have a strong hand in the design requirements... but i do not agree that they should take to sketching as a means of communication.

in my experience its detrimental to the process because
1. clients are hard to break away from something they've put time into, even though it may be obviously unworkable
2. it shows a lack of trust in the designer to provide what the client wants
3. this lack of trust is damaging to the relationship, coupled with the fact that the designer has to dissect the sketch design and point out all the bad or unworkable aspects.

i have yet to see on a sketch design something a client couldnt ask for either orally at a meeting or in writing.....

muffler

sydthebeat wrote: »

i fully accept and agree that the client should have a strong hand in the design requirements... but i do not agree that they should take to sketching as a means of communication.

Sorry but I cant agree with that. A lot of people know exactly what they want and why shouldn't they prepare their own sketch?

Naturally there is going to be oral communication but the 2 go hand in hand. But its their way of showing the "designer" what they want and its up to the designer then to come up with ideas/suggestions/proposals to ensure that they make full use of the natural lighting, views etc together with design aesthetics.

I have been in this position many many times and while I offer the best advice I can if they stick to their guns then there's not a lot I can do. I tell them whats good/bad and right/wrong and its their choice. I do however tell them that they wont have a choice when it comes to building or planning regs.

Bear in mind that they are going to live in the house for the rest of their lives and not the designer.

brdboard

I Have gone through the design process for our house twice. First time we listed what we were looking for with rooms etc, and met with the architect on site and went thru' the list with him.
Once we got his first set of plans, I couldn't help but "improve" them with sketches, and at the end of the process we still didn't really have a design we were happy with which took full advantage of the site, sun etc.

For this and various other reasons we decided to talk to a different architect with the same list of requirements and left him at it. I think after the first design process we had a very strong idea of what we were looking for which helped. We obviously had comments on his sketches, but I left the sketch pad in my desk and after a few iterations ended with a design we were very happy with.

So my advice is to have a good think about the rooms you want, how you are going to use them and leave your designer do the designing!

v300

sydthebeat wrote: »

here id like to know why clients would decide to try to design the dwelling themselves before meeting the professional who is paid and trained to design ???

The breath-taking arrogance and condescension of that statement typifies my mercifully few dealings with Irish based architects. Are ye ALL like that ? :eek:

sydthebeat

muffler wrote: »

Sorry but I cant agree with that. A lot of people know exactly what they want and why shouldn't they prepare their own sketch?
.

for the reasons ive given above....

i suppose the point is if a person is not experience in designing, which most clients are not, then the resultant is unworkable or incorrect or unacceptable. I think the two threads linked to in the first post are prime example of this.

design as a means of communication takes a certain degree of skill.
speech or text as a means of communication takes a lot less and is a lot more descriptive.

the question is why do some clients take to sketching as a means of communicating their wishes ahead of a written brief??

if its simply a wish that they want to live in their design and all they want is someone to 'draw up' their plans, then thats wholly acceptable. Thats a completely different engagement to what i am referring to here.

i am interested in getting clients views on this or people who have recently gone through the design process with their architect.

sydthebeat

v300 wrote: »

The breath-taking arrogance and condescension of that statement typifies my mercifully few dealings with Irish based architects. Are ye ALL like that ? :eek:

there is certainly no arrogance or condescension meant, and im surprise how you can read that into it.

please contribute to the thread if you have a view on the subject

rayjdav

muffler wrote: »

Bear in mind that they are going to live in the house for the rest of their lives and not the designer.

What Muffler say's here is 100% right imo.

Manys the time I have met the couple on the cold wind swept site in the sticks and they present their sketch. It is not my job to disect their wish list on the spot, which usually does not work for a mirade of reasons, but to show them an alternative to what they presented and be able, through experience, to reinforce my ideas backed up by fact, i.e. regs/planning/sun path etc etc.

Having said that, I have always quoted the above, "you will be living, looking at and paying for it for long enough so make sure your happy with it" speel because, at the end of the day, despite what I think, they as a family know how they live.

I have drawn and got built many the "square box house":eek: and they love it and I have also done the more elaborate design, which, tbh, after planning is achieved and about ready to turn sod, baby 1, 2 or 3 is due and the couples original dream house now becomes "what were we thinking". I have pointed this out to many newly married, no child yet couple, "future proof". Despite what we would like to be producing, the vast majority of people just want the same old same old.

He who pays the piper will be obeyed, at the end of the day......

sydthebeat

brdboard wrote: »

I Have gone through the design process for our house twice. First time we listed what we were looking for with rooms etc, and met with the architect on site and went thru' the list with him.
Once we got his first set of plans, I couldn't help but "improve" them with sketches, and at the end of the process we still didn't really have a design we were happy with which took full advantage of the site, sun etc.

For this and various other reasons we decided to talk to a different architect with the same list of requirements and left him at it. I think after the first design process we had a very strong idea of what we were looking for which helped. We obviously had comments on his sketches, but I left the sketch pad in my desk and after a few iterations ended with a design we were very happy with.

So my advice is to have a good think about the rooms you want, how you are going to use them and leave your designer do the designing!

brdboard, i am interested to know that at any stage before your initial meeting with your architect did you consider sketching down your 'wish list' and if not, why not?
i can understand making changes to a supplied sketch as you have a starting point to go from.

while i appreciate the view of fellow professionals, and agree with the sentiments re paying the piper and all that, its really the psychology behind the clients choice of using sketchs to describe their wishes that im trying to discuss...................rather than the process as taken by brdboard, which i would see as the process which would provide better results.

minotour

interesting thread,

I hope one day to engage an Architect to build my dream home, and you can be damn sure the interaction will begin with several sketches created by hand, design program or whatever i can find.

Of course as a reasonable human being as long as any critical feedback is supportable i would be as flexible as required.

Having said that, all these design shows feature stubborn people arguing with architects and eventually getting their own way and it all ends a big success ("stick to your guns" is commonly floated about) and this is where people get their insipration regardless of the careful selection and editing.

But using a sketch to convey the general shape or a certain must-have feature is surely a positive interaction. I guess anything beyond the basics is where the problems begin.

sydthebeat

minotour wrote: »

But using a sketch to convey the general shape or a certain must-have feature is surely a positive interaction. I guess anything beyond the basics is where the problems begin.

absolutely, but more often than not if a sketch offered at initial stage its a full blown plan and sometimes even elevations.

ive had plans offered on everything from excel to word to cad.... and to be honest the more coherent are actually the hand drawn ones.

i just cannot see how, if a client wants something specific, say 'double height open plan living / kitchen space with a double sides stove feature fireplace leading into a dining room'... that somehow the need to convey this is by graphic rather than speech or text.

is it because clients think the designer is programmed to think more graphically than literally ??

brdboard

sydthebeat wrote: »

brdboard, i am interested to know that at any stage before your initial meeting with your architect did you consider sketching down your 'wish list' and if not, why not?
i can understand making changes to a supplied sketch as you have a starting point to go from.

while i appreciate the view of fellow professionals, and agree with the sentiments re paying the piper and all that, its really the psychology behind the clients choice of using sketchs to describe their wishes that im trying to discuss...................rather than the process as taken by brdboard, which i would see as the process which would provide better results.

Yes I had tried sketching out the house in a number of different shapes, l shape, rectangular, etc, and just coudn't get it to work, I kept ending up with funny shaped rooms, dead space, first floor layout not fitting downstairs, struggling to find a spot for stairs etc etc.
I think it was a useful process though in that I had a fairly good idea of what we were looking for and was able to give the architect a good idea for what we were looking for. Although we still went thru' 3 or 4 revisions before we were happy.

woody1

sydthebeat wrote: »

is it because clients think the designer is programmed to think more graphically than literally ??

sorry i know im not a client but thats probably gotten down to the core of it

clients probably think its easier to explain to a person that works graphically, what they the clients want, with pictures
and to a degree they probably think thats what we want as well, when we'd all be as happy with a list of requirements and a few photos of what style houses they like...

sinnerboy

So far I have not had the experience where client presented me with sketches and expected them to be implemented to very last line as I think you are suggesting syd.

The client sketches were very much a starting point from where I picked up to develop the design. Sometimes the completed design is pretty close to the ideas in the client sketch and sometimes it's a complete departure. Client always involved , it usually works out.

I do find the worst client is the one who has NO idea of what they want. It can sometimes translate into " I'm going to reject everything you suggest" . Thankfully that does not happen too often but is has happened to me.

A scrapbook of photos showing example of likes - and dislikes - is a very very usefull way for a client to communicate to a designer.

So why do clients sketch ? Well everybody has some visual sense and appreciation perhaps how else would they comfortably instruct their wishes ?


To clients I would advise

1. Write a list of all rooms and approx m2/fts sizes
2. Assemble a scapbook
3. By all means sketch if inclined to do so.
4. Be open to suggestion/advice from the designer.

martinn123

Having read the two threads you refer to in opening post, my first thought would be to commend both for having a go, and then posting their initial sketches to this Forum for remarks. It shows in my opinion that they take the design aspect so seriously, they want to be involved.
I am sure both would have taken comments given, and worked them into a further sketch, and then had a conversation with their chosen Arch.

In starting this further thread you run the risk, again in my opinion, of coming across as being elitist, the only ones who '' understand'' how to design a house, and unwilling to take instructions from a client who wants to put some ideas down on paper.

Verbal comunication, is the most common, but there is a statistic, that only a small percentage of verbal comunication is remembered after a conversation wheras at least the sketch remains.

The post from,v300, may be typical reaction from non Arch's to the discussion you are having, perhaps a Forum for Arch's only would be the answer.

and yes people dont trust architects to design anything other than a monument to themselves, not helped by certain design programmes where architects come off as a little bit precious..

design as a means of communication takes a certain degree of skill.
speech or text as a means of communication takes a lot less and is a lot more descriptive.

These two statments sum up the chasm between some Arch, and their clients

woody1

and yes people dont trust architects to design anything other than a monument to themselves, not helped by certain design programmes where architects come off as a little bit precious..

martinn123, wasnt meant to be elitist in the slightest, in fact it was meant to be the opposite, ie that some people see us as precious overly sensitive little darlings that have a fit if a window is moved 6 inches left or right or god forbid made of pvc , that whatever we design is for us and us alone , thanks for the work but can you please go away and let me design my ( sorry your ) house in peace,oh and can you add another 100k to the budget, which is why they are wary and can come in with a house drawn right down the last detail and then wont budge on anything,

im laughing here cos im about as far from elitist as its possible to be, like i said originally id much rather get a sketch than a client with no-ideas or input at all as that usually ends in tears....

sydthebeat

i see brdboards post where he says

I think it was a useful process though in that I had a fairly good idea of what we were looking for and was able to give the architect a good idea for what we were looking for.

as being very telling and useful.

in formulating the brief some clients would need to visualise the spaces they require and i can see a connection with them requiring to form this in a graphic manner.

sydthebeat

martinn123 wrote: »

Having read the two threads you refer to in opening post, my first thought would be to commend both for having a go, and then posting their initial sketches to this Forum for remarks. It shows in my opinion that they take the design aspect so seriously, they want to be involved.
I am sure both would have taken comments given, and worked them into a further sketch, and then had a conversation with their chosen Arch.

In starting this further thread you run the risk, again in my opinion, of coming across as being elitist, the only ones who '' understand'' how to design a house, and unwilling to take instructions from a client who wants to put some ideas down on paper.

Verbal comunication, is the most common, but there is a statistic, that only a small percentage of verbal comunication is remembered after a conversation wheras at least the sketch remains.

The post from,v300, may be typical reaction from non Arch's to the discussion you are having, perhaps a Forum for Arch's only would be the answer.




These two statments sum up the chasm between some Arch, and their clients

martin, hello.........

Verbal comunication, is the most common, but there is a statistic, that only a small percentage of verbal comunication is remembered after a conversation wheras at least the sketch remains.

thats why we have written briefs and any half decent architect will be talking down a list of requirements as he discusses this brief with the clients.... also, anyone who designs for a living will know the difficultly in communicating through a graphic.... for lay persons this is immeasurably more difficult and usually end up in the probelms as brdboards outlined earlier.

Having read the two threads you refer to in opening post, my first thought would be to commend both for having a go, and then posting their initial sketches to this Forum for remarks. It shows in my opinion that they take the design aspect so seriously, they want to be involved.

i completely agree.

In starting this further thread you run the risk, again in my opinion, of coming across as being elitist, the only ones who '' understand'' how to design a house, and unwilling to take instructions from a client who wants to put some ideas down on paper.

i do not walk into a mechanics with a diagram of how to change the filter in my car, nor do i order a cake in a bakers with a recipe to be followed. Yet i fully understand the personal skills required to be good at their professions.... these are not mutually exclusive. And if you read back on ALL the posts in this thread you will see that nowhere did anyone suggest a designer being

unwilling to take instructions from a client who wants to put some ideas down on paper.

.... quite the opposite actually. The clients who do actually put their ideas "down on paper" are they ones who are more mallable to creative design than those who try to design themselves. Thats my experience in the industry anyway and if you have had other experiences designing for clients so be it.

These two statments sum up the chasm between some Arch, and their clients

the two statements you quoted have absolutely NOTHING to do with each other, are you sure you've understood them correctly?

fclauson

I think the days of a written to an architect are gone - sorry all - with the huge number of programs on TV telling you how and what you can achieve in terms of a building from concept, to google sketchup 3d, to the technology you can deploy etc folks will be coming to the architect much better informed and much better opinionated (to give a parallelisam who has not googled they symptoms before going to a Doctor and then telling them "I have xxx complaint" )

The tide has turned for many one-off builders that they are now empowed to do so much more for themselves with autocad/visio etc etc etc that elements of the service offered by the architect as of 20 years ago has become redundant.

For architect to think that people are going to come to them as they have always done with a loose set of ideas and allowed the architect to design will only now happen in a very few cases (typical where the is an abundance of €€€€€ available to fund the service) - more often than not it will be working in partnership with the client to evolve their ideas which might be presented in many different formats.

Architecture like all other professions now moves so rapidaly (EWI, 300mm cavity, ICF .........) that to stay ahead of all of this is impossible and client (like a paitent) will be much better informed on certain aspects of a build than the architect.

Finally - to summaries the process we went through to work with the excellant architect we have (along with the struct. engineer, the thermal consultant, the window supplier, the heating consultant, the contractor, the BER assessor, the archeologist, Google and of course Boards.ie) was as Sinnerboy mentioned to go along to that first meeting with a portfolio of "stuff" from which our design emerged.

The whole team inputed changes and update from their own experiences which transformed that initial design into a Passive (almost ), pragmatic, price sensative, and practical design - and I hope as the house comes out of the ground (just at wall plate level today) we end up with what we want which at the end of the day is what building your own house is all about all about.

fclauson

sydthebeat wrote: »

....
i do not walk into a mechanics with a diagram of how to change the filter in my car, nor do i order a cake in a bakers with a recipe to be followed.
..

not certain - listen to the news- after any incident there are countless "experts" on hand to offer up what happened and what went wrong

Telgere

sydthebeat wrote: »

(as a result of this thread and this thread ive started this discussion)

Why do you think that the best way to communicate your wishes to your architect is by trying to design the dwelling yourself?

Like most things there is a myriad of information now available to anyone with a internet connection. People do tend to mull over certain or all aspects of a new house be it the interior or exterior. Simple tools abound now that where not available even a few years ago.

Why not let the architect know what you are thinking, down to the individual if they take on their architects advice. I'm sure that hasn't changed since time immemorial.

bruschi

sydthebeat wrote: »

i do not walk into a mechanics with a diagram of how to change the filter in my car, nor do i order a cake in a bakers with a recipe to be followed.

no, but you arent using comparable items here.


you would go into a car dealers and look for a coupe or something, maybe have a picture of a type of car you like, not what ever the dealer likes.

and you would go to a baker to order a cake, with the design you would like, and maybe have pictures of a cake you saw that you would like.

what you would expect is advise from the dealer/baker to say what they could add to the car/cake to improve it or what might suit the person better. Even a simple thing. For our wedding cake, we told the baker we both hated raisins, but she still put them in because she always does. Pi$sed me right off. If people are paying for something, they should have it the way they would like it, as much as it is possible.

I know you didnt mean it at all syd, but it was mentioned above that it sounded arrogant, and to be honest, it was the impression I got from the OP too.

As if why would a client want to show a sketch of the house that they are going to live in for the rest of their lives. Its their house, and if they want it looking how they like, then its up to the architect to make it work as best they can, and advise where changes may be needed.

Most people without construction or design knowledge need visual help. they dont know how much is 20m2. they need to see it on plans or a mock up or whatever. My wife couldnt get how our house would look until I did a few crude hand sketches so she understood how it would look then. Whilst it is easy for some to visualise areas or plans, its not the same for others, so sketches can help them see what they want.

sydthebeat

bruschi wrote: »

As if why would a client want to show a sketch of the house that they are going to live in for the rest of their lives. Its their house, and if they want it looking how they like, then its up to the architect to make it work as best they can, and advise where changes may be needed.

to carry on the car analogy, to me thats like paying for a Ferrari but before its out of the dealers youve already putting a speed restrictor on it.

why is there a reluctance to allow the designer to design?? why is there a fear of the unknown if a client can give a clear and consise brief ??

or is it as a lot of people have been saying that we now live in a culture of "have a go" because of internet info availability??
i will diagnose myself on line..... ill build my own PC on line... ill purchase a new camera on line.....ill create a new persona in a virtual world on line...
... and now we have "ill design my own house" on line??

Most people without construction or design knowledge need visual help. they dont know how much is 20m2. they need to see it on plans or a mock up or whatever.

i completely agree... id even go asfar to say that most people cannot picture a room when they are standing in the middle of the foundations and rising walls... however when it comes to the most important area you and your family will be living in for 25+ years of your life, would you not entrust the absolute primary requirements of light and space to the ability of a skilled professional??

i mean, how often are the online diagnoses correct????

muffler

sydthebeat wrote: »

why is there a fear of the unknown if a client can give a clear and consise brief ??

This is a good point and I'll answer that....for some situations only.

The "unknown" shouldn't even come into it. The clients have a clear vision of what they want and not what the designer wants. So when a person presents you with a sketch and engages in discussions outlining their requirements then they expect to get what they are looking for and not what you want to give them or think they should have.

There are so many horror stories about people ending up with a house they didnt want yet it was a house that their architect basically "forced" upon them. There is a widely held belief that some architects use certain clients as guinea pigs so to speak in order to express their flair for design.

So you really cant blame people if they are sceptical or apprehensive at times.

As I said earlier if someone comes to me with a sketch, which is something I actually welcome, I sit down with them and go through the various options and give them the best advice I can. I make it quite clear that no matter what they want it will have to comply with all statutory regulations and I wont budge from that. If however they dont want to take my advice on other issues I simply tell them that they will be the people looking at it for the rest of their lives and not me. Take the horse to the water and all that jazz

I recall a couple of jobs (new house plans) over the years where the houses looked more like stables or outhouses where I felt compelled to insert the following text on the plans - "plans prepared strictly in accordance with clients instructions"

fclauson

sydthebeat wrote: »

...
why is there a reluctance to allow the designer to design?? why is there a fear of the unknown if a client can give a clear and consise brief ??

in the same way archs do not like being presented with designs clients are of the same ilk - think how hard it is to say to an arch - you completly missed what I asked for, you miss interprited my requirments , "please start again"

or is it as a lot of people have been saying that we now live in a culture of "have a go" because of internet info availability??
i will diagnose myself on line..... ill build my own PC on line... ill purchase a new camera on line.....ill create a new persona in a virtual world on line...
... and now we have "ill design my own house" on line??

But there is where we are now - the tide has turned - people feel empowered (right or wrong) to "have a go" at anything

In the same way computer systems are no longer written from a massive spec document developed over many months but from a notion of an idea and rapid design technique (thats write 4 lines of code, test it , write 4 more, test it .......... and typicall have a fully working code base multiple times per day rather than at the end of a 6 month development cycle) archs need to move into this world of rapid design iterations which will include lots of client input. Bringa skecht to a client and be prepared to totally change it following their input.

They also need need to update their services to meet the modern client who is coming empowerd to include ne of

• compliance
• aesthetics
• technology integration
• building techniques
• thermal efficiency
• "greenness"
• "eco"
• .... the list goes on

I am now able to read all of the TGDs (not only from Ireland, but the UK, Germany, the USA ....) I can read the latest industry thinking on new and innovative products, I can attend trade shows, I monitor twitter, I use facebook and get advice from many multiple of sources (e.g. in my case probably spoken to 10 or 15 MVRH system suppliers and have had to merge and mesh their comments to form an opinion of what will actually work - and then manage the conflict they create in my brain when one says one thing and another the direct opposite)

end of ramble :rolleyes:

bruschi

muffler wrote: »

This is a good point and I'll answer that....for some situations only.

The "unknown" shouldn't even come into it. The clients have a clear vision of what they want and not what the designer wants. So when a person presents you with a sketch and engages in discussions outlining their requirements then they expect to get what they are looking for and not what you want to give them or think they should have.

There are so many horror stories about people ending up with a house they didnt want yet it was a house that their architect basically "forced" upon them. There is a widely held belief that some architects use certain clients as guinea pigs so to speak in order to express their flair for design.

So you really cant blame people if they are sceptical or apprehensive at times.

As I said earlier if someone comes to me with a sketch, which is something I actually welcome, I sit down with them and go through the various options and give them the best advice I can. I make it quite clear that no matter what they want it will have to comply with all statutory regulations and I wont budge from that. If however they dont want to take my advice on other issues I simply tell them that they will be the people looking at it for the rest of their lives and not me. Take the horse to the water and all that jazz

I recall a couple of jobs (new house plans) over the years where the houses looked more like stables or outhouses where I felt compelled to insert the following text on the plans - "plans prepared strictly in accordance with clients instructions"

some good points.

and the main one,

they will be the people looking at it for the rest of their lives and not me

its not the architects house, its the clients house. On the other thread I assume many of the architects dont like the bog standard design of the house sketched by the client, but its his choice, and it is the way he wants it. Why should he compromise what he needs and wants just so the architect can let his creative flair and design shine through. It may be boring and against what the architect would like to do, but at the end of the day you are being paid by the client to make their house work.

I personally dont think its a fear of letting the designer design, its more a case of the person knowing what they would like, and not what the designer would like. They are hugely different things. Its about peoples taste and needs. I think a sketch would help more than hinder what they want. There is no point spending ages designing something that the client will turn down, at least with a sketch you have an idea of what they want and can make the necessary modifications to meet regs etc then.

BryanF

bruschi wrote: »

but its his choice, and it is the way he wants it. Why should he compromise what he needs and wants just so the architect can let his creative flair and design shine through. It may be boring and against what the architect would like to do

the design in question and the point made by the Arch's in that thread is that the design is already compromised. while many clients may not be able to visualise how a space/layout will work a good arch can HELP a client to do so, but this is easier without a client sketch

i think one of syd's many points is that, once any of us arch /client get fixated on a layout it can be hard to move away from it. if a detailed brief is taken without a client sketch, this allows the arch to incorporate solar orientation, the surrounding landscape, the local vernacular style, the clients uses/ requirements - everything, well proportioned rooms that connect/flow into one another, that can still look eloquent from the external.

imo we've been ruin ruined by the 70-80's bungalow bliss book of designs and many of the local councils have issued design guides trying to help us move away from this mockery of our rural traditional Irish form. many of us grew up in these homes and older homes where keeping out the elements was more important than layout, views or sunlight. we're now beyond worrying just about the rain and can incorporate the above mentioned factors, if given the chance..

sydthebeat

BryanF wrote: »

i think one of syd's many points is that, once any of us arch /client get fixated on a layout it can be hard to move away from it. if a detailed brief is taken without a client sketch, this allows the arch to incorporate solar orientation, the surrounding landscape, the local vernacular style, the clients uses/ requirements - everything, well proportioned rooms that connect/flow into one another, that can still look eloquent from the external.

thats exactly the point.

i want to be clear here again for a second time....
i am not referring to client who wants to design their own house and simply are looking for someone to 'draw up' their plan.. they are not for turning and thats fine.

what i am trying to get the root of is why some clients feel the need to take to the drawing board themselves before meeting their designer.

brdboard offered some solid insight into this and im grateful....
so far in this thread we had views from the following clients:

john cappa :- who has come from a not for turning standpoint but may be softening
brdboard:- who has been happy to let the designer do the designing and (hopefully) is happy with the result
minotaur:- who has yet to go through the process but feels a skech is important to "convey the general shape or must have features
fclauson:- who approached the designer with a portfolio... and doesnt say if there was a full sketch (am i safe to assume the wasnt?)

to john cappa, can i ask was the reason you approached your architect with a pre designed plan:
1. because you knew exactly what you wanted and you just wanted someone to draw up the plans and smooth out any rough edges?
2. because in order to figure out what you actually wanted you needed to see this drawn out in front of you... and as you had it sketched you offered it to the architect as the brief?
3. because you want to live in a house you designed yourself?
4. is it because you didn't think the architect would give you want you wanted?

or some other reason?

interestingly theres no mention of fear or distrust from clients, but rather professionals... i wonder is there something telling about this?

im sorry but personally i do not at all buy the opinion that clients are fearful of the architect using them as guinea pigs... there should NEVER be an element of fear or distrust in the relationship between the designer and the client.. and if it exists the engagemnet should be broken. We have often advised here when a clients trust is broken with the designer that the relationship should be severed. i dont know how anyone could work under those conditions. yes there are architects who are arrogant and come across as know alls, but that attitude should be directly proportional to demand for their service.

fclauson

sydthebeat wrote: »

fclauson:- who approached the designer with a portfolio... and doesnt say if there was a full sketch (am i safe to assume the wasnt?)

Correct - was not a full sketch but some basic ideas (big family kitchen, winter snug ....... etc ) with some pictures of what we had seen about the area plus some pictures off that internet thing
also (and importantly if you have read my other threads) a passion to make sure the house is as energy efficient as possible WITHOUT COMPRIMISING the desing (ie. I have windows on the north - so what - I loose a couple of Watts but they are needed for rooms on that side)

No6

Lads I am arriving very late to this one but in my very humble opinion every design is a compromise between what the client wants, what they think they want, what they can afford, what the planners will let them have, what the regulations say they must have and what the designer translates all of the previous into some form of coherent design that achieves some or all of these requirement!!!

I have had various clients over the years from both extremes and at all points in between and I can truly say just because they have done a sketch or like a plan from somewhere else dosnt mean they shouldn't be given suggestions for improvements. A long time ago I did a house for a couple, it had to be exactly like this house kind of job, are you sure I siad (several times) definately was the frim reply.. I met them several years later and when I asked how they were getting on in their house was told, the next time I was doing a house like thier one I should make the kitchen bigger!!... What can you say to that, the client is always right??

Pixie Chief

I completely understand that it is not meant that way, but this thread does come across as extraordinarily arrogant and condescending. Why should someone with a vision of how they want their life inside and outside a house for a considerable amount of time not attempt to conclusively as possible communicate that? I can completely accept that there are a vast number of things about drawing a design that I do not know or understand. Can you, as a professional, accept that are things about my life and how it is and how I want it to be that you don't understand? Almost everyone setting about building their dream home will have lived in a variety of homes before this point. There will be features about those houses that they will try to recreate (and other homes that they have visited) and other features that they hated and do not want under any circumstances. There are probably many elements about my 'dream home' (should it ever happen) sketches that will be difficult to incorporate or perhaps impossible and that is why I will take them to an architect. They will assess the site and draw something using those sketches incorporating as much as possible of the elements that I want to achieve.

It never occurred to me for a second that the said architect might well look at my sketches and tell me that I am not qualified to draw out elements of my new home and that I should just write down a list of my requirements and let them at it. A house is not just a home, it is a way of life, a lifestyle if you will.

If an architect were to say to me that I was unqualified to attempt rough sketches of ideas about how I want my life to be in that home, I would not be working with that architect. I work fairly visually given my work as photographer, writer and casual graphic designer so it would be my natural form of communication.

Do you know how the interior flow needs to work to make life easy if you have two kids with autism? I doubt it. Unless you also moonlight as a vet, you probably don't understand the difficulties posed by having both dogs and cats in the house and the need to keep them separated (with kids and guests wandering house leaving doors open). Add those factors together and you have someone whose social life largely operates at home. We have a fairly constant stream of friends and impromptu little parties, bbq's etc. It takes quite a clever layout to cope easily with all of those things.

And finally yes, of course I have the skills to verbally list and communicate those ideas but not everybody does. But drawing it out is more than that. I have various drawings and ideas for my dream home over the years inspired by all sorts of things. When I get the opportunity to do so, I will almost certainly be drawing a new set when I'm doing it for real. This is a house that I have dreamed of for years and while I do not possess the qualifications to address technical issues and considerations, I know how I want it to look and feel and work for me. I want it to be 'my' home - perfect in every way for myself, my life and my family. I want to pull up outside and feel happy just looking at it, especially considering how hard I have had to work and sacrifice to achieve it. I feel entitled to visualize it, draw it, draw it again with my partner, argue about various things, compromise, redraw it think and dream about it long before I get to an architect who I hope will help me to make as much of it as possible happen.

It rarely happens here on boards but this thread actually makes me really angry. If your job isn't to help me create a home that myself and my family will love forever then why are you designing homes for families. The notion that I am supposed to merely submit a written list of requirements and then meekly build whatever you come up with because you are the s**t and I am not is arrogant and condescending whether you mean it to be or not.

Perhaps you should start a thread to list architects who are the "Dr Greg House" of the design world and also those who gain their job satisfaction from successfully translating a families dreams into a workable design and creating something that will make THEM happy for years. That way, clients like myself who annoyingly persist in having a vision of their own dream home (gasp, shock!) won't be clogging up your precious, professional and above all, qualified time!

BryanF

Pixie Chief wrote: »

The notion that I am supposed to merely submit a written list of requirements and then meekly build whatever you come up with because you are the s**t and I am not is arrogant and condescending whether you mean it to be or not.

there is No suggestion that you should not get everything you want from your house design. No intention to be condescending. And from my perspective and IMHO this is Purely about the initial interaction with designer and client. From there it is a Design Process and at No stage will or should you feel like you are being dictated to in Any-Sort of an arrogant way. If you have a vision Great, an arch's jobs is to Full-Fill this and Carry it out on your behalf, IMHO this thread is to Simply to Outline how this initiail interaction and transfer of ideas is best achieved and I welcome your perspective.

muffler

Pixie Chief banned for 1 week for personal abuse.

sydthebeat

Pixie Chief wrote: »

Why should someone with a vision of how they want their life inside and outside a house for a considerable amount of time not attempt to conclusively as possible communicate that?

:rolleyes:

i know you are banned for a week and cant reply to this but you have COMPLETELY missed the point altogether.

the question is not one of allowing a client to communicate their wishes or not.... the question is why do they first reach for a drawing board and design the 'whole plan' to communicate their wishes instead of the other forms of communication available ie

an oral brief
a written brief
photographs
magazine cuttings
or video links via web
elemental sketchs
etc

or as some here have already done, and is encouraged by the designers, to come in with a portfolio of ideas which are an accumulation of the above

the question is quite specific and im amazed at how many people are pulling all sorts of incorrect assumptions from it....

what this thread is showing me, to my amazement, is that there seems to be a strong feeling in some people that designers are not to be trusted and will in some devious way try to force a client to pay for and live in something that they are NOT happy with.... this cynicism saddens me deeply.

sinnerboy

Pixie Chief wrote: »

It rarely happens here on boards but this thread actually makes me really angry.

Please re read the thread. You will see posts from designers which vary from the OP. And posts from clients which challenge the OP and which the OP thanks.

As a designer I read this whole exercise as a valuable way to understand "the client body" better , seeking answers not dictating anything.

Again for my own part I restate that from my own perspective you would be an ideal client - very strong ideas of what you want.

The worst ones are those that have no idea. Open to all ideas and none and liable to change their minds at the drop of a hat. And hold everyone but themselves to blame then when a project fails to run smoothly.

fclauson

sydthebeat wrote: »

:rolleyes:

...
what this thread is showing me, to my amazement, is that there seems to be a strong feeling in some people that designers are not to be trusted and will in some devious way try to force a client to pay for and live in something that they are NOT happy with.... this cynicism saddens me deeply.

Syd
unfortunatly your profession
has damaged its self over the past few years with tactics such as a

1. % fee based on build cost which has crept out of control during the build process and hence the fee has crept up which clients feel is unfair
2. lack of rigerous implementation of regulations & accountability
3. and the general miss trust that has crept across many professions in the current cliement when people feel lack of empowerment in controlling their own destiny

So how to fix - its back to the hold fashion trust, one-on-one and reputation which will build and sustain a practice in any field of skills or expertiese

bruschi

sydthebeat wrote: »

:rolleyes:

i know you are banned for a week and cant reply to this but you have COMPLETELY missed the point altogether.

the question is not one of allowing a client to communicate their wishes or not.... the question is why do they first reach for a drawing board and design the 'whole plan' to communicate their wishes instead of the other forms of communication available ie

an oral brief
a written brief
photographs
magazine cuttings
or video links via web
elemental sketchs
etc

or as some here have already done, and is encouraged by the designers, to come in with a portfolio of ideas which are an accumulation of the above

the question is quite specific and im amazed at how many people are pulling all sorts of incorrect assumptions from it....

what this thread is showing me, to my amazement, is that there seems to be a strong feeling in some people that designers are not to be trusted and will in some devious way try to force a client to pay for and live in something that they are NOT happy with.... this cynicism saddens me deeply.

so, the original question,

Why do you think that the best way to communicate your wishes to your architect is by trying to design the dwelling yourself?

I think has been clearly answered a lot of times. I'm not sure where it has incorrect assumptions have been made. Most have said clients have an idea of how their house, the one in which they are going to live in, and the best way they feel they can communicate that is by sketching it.

I really dont see how you feel this comes across as designers arent to be trusted. At the end of the day, the architect is employed by the client to design their house as best they can. Its the client who will live in it for the rest of their lives. I'm sure there are many architects hwo have designed houses or other projects that they hated, but because of the specific requirements of a client, did it for their benefit despite their misgivings.

I really dont understand why its seen as a bad thing by some that a client wants to get their designs across by sketching it themselves. Some architects have notions of mad designs and showpiece houses, and it may not suit the client. They want a home, not a piece of art. Yes, it is possible to integrate both, but its their choice.

sydthebeat

bruschi wrote: »

I'm not sure where it has incorrect assumptions have been made.

1. It never occurred to me for a second that the said architect might well look at my sketches and tell me that I am not qualified to draw out elements of my new home

i have always refereed to people trying to sketch the whole plan... not individual elements.

2. If an architect were to say to me that I was unqualified to attempt rough sketches of ideas about how I want my life to be in that home, I would not be working with that architect.

this was never proposed or insinuated

3. you run the risk........ of coming across as being..... the only ones who '' understand'' how to design a house, and unwilling to take instructions from a client who wants to put some ideas down on paper.

another misunderstood insinuation

Do you know how the interior flow needs to work to make life easy if you have two kids with autism? I doubt it. Unless you also moonlight as a vet, you probably don't understand the difficulties posed by having both dogs and cats in the house and the need to keep them separated (with kids and guests wandering house leaving doors open). Add those factors together and you have someone whose social life largely operates at home. We have a fairly constant stream of friends and impromptu little parties, bbq's etc. It takes quite a clever layout to cope easily with all of those things.

i do not accept this for an instant... as if the designer CANNOT design to account for the specifics of a clients brief and that the client is the only only who understands the difficulties inherent...
this kind of view point shows a distrust of the designer
if thats the attitude held, whats the point of going to a designer at all????

the phrase

It takes quite a clever layout to cope easily with all of those things.

is very telling here... here the poster implicitly suggests the designer couldn't possibily come up with a clever layout.... yet the necessity to have a clever layout is the one which brings the client to the designer in the ist place.
Its interesting to revert back to brdboards post where he says he initially started to design the dwelling himself but found problems in making it work... thus i hope giving an appreciation of the work the designer did to make his wishes happen.

I really dont see how you feel this comes across as designers arent to be trusted

i am most definitely not the one who suggested this.... i argued against this... see fclausons most recent post and what muffler says here

I really dont understand why its seen as a bad thing by some that a client wants to get their designs across by sketching it themselves.

ive already outlined why this may not necessarily be a good thing (for a client to design the whole plan) themselves here and here... so please have a read to prevent me from repeating.

as the main protaginist here i dont mind posters who may take from this thread that i come across as arrogant or conceited.. any one who knows me knows that thats so far from the truth. I am using it as a tool to get into the mindset of those who are and would be clients to see why they approach the process in such a manner.... i am getting very valuable feed back along which i am very grateful for.

Certified

As stated by others, It is a good sign that clients put effort into their design brief for their home. What they say or do not say is fundamental to getting a successful design. A sketch is the best way to illustrate a design concept or idea, we all do it.
I will sometimes even ask them during a design briefing to draw/sketch the ideas they are trying to get across as not everybody knows the terminology.

They may even have a fairly detailed drawing made up of a whole house :eek:Grand, whats the issue with that? Assess it, provide your input and make changes if/where required. If a plan or concept provided just does not work at all, I would just work on a second alternative design and show them both and let them make up their own mind.

I have to agree with Pixie Chief and I really dont know why she got a weeks ban. It was a refreshingly honest post.

I dont understand why the question was asked? Surely the answer was obvious enough and you have to concede that, it is rude to even suggest that a client should not even doodle or sketch before meeting with the architect?

People are generally nice and want to help others. Thats why most clients sketch their ideas before meeting the architect. To help save the Architect time and hassle

sydthebeat

Certified wrote: »

If a plan or concept provided just does not work at all, I would just work on a second alternative design and show them both and let them make up their own mind.

Certified wrote: »

Thats why most clients sketch their ideas before meeting the architect. To help save the Architect time and hassle

well theres an obvious dichotomy here isnt there.
time is not saved if you end up working on two plans...

All i can refer to is my previous experience and in my own experience

1. client who have go to the trouble of drawing the plan themselves are a lot less malleable and open to suggestion than those who dont.

2. in my experience clients who actually come in with a plan pre-made are actually less in requirement of some one to 'design' and actually are more inclined to want there idea "drawn up".

3. the more successful designs have been the ones where there has been more of a "is this what you want" kind of relationship than "this is what i want"... take from that what you will, but thats the feed back ive gotten from clients when meeting them years later.

to be perfectly honest my ideal client is someone who comes in with strong ideas of the spaces required and the flow required. I haven't yet met a client who wasnt able to verbalise what they required in their home.....
i show clients previous examples of work and from that judge their willingness or not to be conservative or adventurous with the eventual design. Call it what you will but I would always prefer to start with a blank page if designing, and i would assert that most designers would.

Regarding time taken to go from brief to a satisfied plan, i can honestly say that its ALWAYS the pre-designed plans that take longer to get through both the sketch design stage and the planning stage. This can be due to the fact that the client wants to sick to their guns with a design factor; for example, a double room deep two storey plan (like john cappas) which may cause form, mass, bulk and height issues at planning stage .. etc
.. or it could be due to the fact that i will always challenge a brief if theres an issue that i see in it, which i feel is a professional responsibility, and its the working though these challenges thats time consuming.

while i dont accept the "it saves the architect time" argument as being really a factor, ill include it as a possible reason to take to the drawing board. I would like to think that a client would expect their designer to put all the time as necessary to make their wishes work because they pay enough for the service.