Before/After Filmstrip

Post by Catarina Ferreira, AIA

Over the past couple of years, we have been fortunate to have the opportunity to be involved in a number of residential renovation projects that have resulted in some pretty radical transformations. Here are a just few before/after exterior images of some of the projects we completed.

 

Our Cubic House Renovation consisted of a full gut renovation of a 1940's brick house searching for an identity. Work included a bay window addition at the front, a kitchen, family room and master suite addition at the rear. These interventions expanded the living space and gave the house a new personality. The interior spaces were entirely renovated as well.

Our Brookland House Renovation involved a gut renovation and addition to an early 1900's house, including a new kitchen and family room, new master suite, window, roof and siding replacement, entirely new interior spaces.

 

Our Annapolis Renovation involved giving a 1974 foreclosed property a new life, through a complete renovation and localized additions, involving changes to roof lines, new windows and siding, and entirely new interior spaces.

 

Our DC Roof Deck Renovation involved replacing a problematic, poorly built roof deck in Adams Morgan with a raised deck on pedestals, a pergola that is structurally connected to the structure of the house, an outdoor kitchen and fireplace.

THE VALUE OF AN ARCHITECT

Post by Catarina Ferreira, AIA

As of late, we have come across several would be clients who hired someone other than an architect to help them design their home. In some cases, the projects in question would be dream projects to a small firm like archi-TEXTUAL. Sizable, contemporary homes, in great locations and fantastic settings. What drives these clients to avoid the services of an architect? What can we do about it, if anything?

Time and again, the public at large fails to understand what we do, and why, from their perspective, it costs so much. Design-build firms often wrap up design fees with overall construction costs, or provide design services for no additional charge (at least on paper). No offense to my colleagues in the design-build line of work, but this is a problem. I'm not trying to make enemies here, after all, I work with you all the time to get our projects built... Many GC's call themselves design/build. In the case of the ones I work with, they do the building, we do the designing.  We do it as a team. This approach works, and delivers a higher quality product to our clients. Architect-led design build firms, or design-build firms that actually higher an architect to do the design work, can also provide quality services.

However, many times, traditional design-build firms are led by well-meaning individuals who are not necessarily architects but like to design houses, and some do a decent job at it, many do not. A structural engineer usually signs and seals the drawings, which allows them to procure permits and get their designs built. So why wouldn't you hire a design-build firm instead of a boutique, over-priced architecture firm to design your house?

There are many reasons. Overall, hiring an architect will get you a better end result, and will not necessarily cost more. Here's why:

1. Just because you are told you are not paying for design fees by a design-build firm, or you are paying $5,000 for 'the plans' for a $500k house, instead of $50,000 to an architect, doesn't mean that's the case. Let's look at the big picture: most GC's have a markup of around 20% built into construction costs by default, whether it is officially listed on the construction cost breakdown or not. On a house cost $500k, that's $100k in fees, above and beyond what is paid to sub-contractors. Those fees are for managing the process, to cover their direct staff expenses, developing schedules and estimates, coordinating sub-contractors work, etc.  Since they are charging 20% in overhead and profit already, these firms can afford to charge clients $5k for bare minimum design services. It's in the construction phase that they make their money, and without an architect involved to help clients evaluate construction costs, the overall cost may be higher than if an architect's services had been procured.

2. Architect's fees cover much more than 'the set of plans.' Most architect's fees for such a house would be in the range of 8% to 15%, sometimes more. For more information regarding how architects charge, go here. Let's say 12% is a reasonable fee for designing a custom, contemporary home. On a $500k home, that's $60k for working with clients for several months, sometimes more than 1 year including construction, to do just this: develop a truly custom designed home working closely with clients, and revise designs as needed; draw every detail of it (or, in our case, build a model of it in the virtual world); prepare detailed documents for permitting purposes, which often involve several consultants as well, whose work we coordinate; help clients get through permitting; help clients with material, finish and fixture choices and often provide 3d views of what it will all look like in the end; help to ensure that construction goes smoothly by visiting the site frequently; attend various meetings; review product orders (aka submittal review) before orders are placed to ensure the right products are being ordered; evaluate change order proposals to ensure accuracy and fairness, or provide alternate solutions if the cost is too high, and finally, ensure that the work has been adequately completed down to the smallest detail, so that our clients can enjoy their new home. These services take up months of solid work and staff salaries and related overhead expenses, including rent, equipment, expensive software, insurance, etc. 

3. When you work with an independent architect and builder, versus an all-in-one design build firm, there is a checks and balances system in place. There are 3 independent parties involved: client, architect, contractor. With a good team and division of labor, the contractor helps to keep the architect's design within budget, the architect helps the client get the most for his money, the client is happy. This is often a contentious process, and perhaps that's the way it should be, but it is in the client’s best interest. When you hire a design-build firm, they have 2/3 of the power: they control design and quality, and cost. There's an inherent conflict of interest in that arrangement: they do the design, and try to build it for the lowest cost possible. You don't get the same level of quality in design or construction. And, again, you are not necessarily paying less overall...

4. We are in the process of helping clients to redesign homes that they had originally intended to build with a design-build firm, but were not satisfied with the designs produced. I'm sure this happens frequently. Again, no offense to my design-build colleagues out there, but quality design is hard to pull off if you are not an architect.

5. Here's an example of what an architect can give you in design quality, which will also result in higher property value, and quality of life:

 

This single-family residential project in rural MD, by archi-TEXTUAL,  is about to go into construction.

For more information about the value of an architect, and how to work with an architect, go here.

Going 'Neutral' (?)

post by Catarina Ferreira, AIA

archi-TEXTUAL is known for clean, contemporary architectural design. While that is our preferred style, our work always tries to be more than skin deep.

From time to time, we run into a client that challenges us to go against our norm, and asks us to tone down our stylistic preferences, in favor of a more timeless, 'warmer,' more marketable look.  How to do that without compromising our integrity, without selling out and going mainstream, is the question. Can we really do beige instead of pure white? Well... maybe warmish light grey. Is that warm enough for the mainstream?

I happen to believe that good architecture is so much more than skin deep, that when it is good, style is truly just a detail. Still, you will not catch me designing a 'neo-colonial in this lifetime'... 

How to please our clients while sticking to our belief that contemporary architecture is more than just a style and is here to stay is a true challenge. Is it possible to produce 'style neutral' architecture? That is an old question...  when modernism first emerged, one of its goals was to be the 'non-style.' These days, even 'transitional' (whatever that means) is a style.

We don't actually think, or design, in a style; contemporary aesthetics are the default given the times we live in, the materials and technology available to us, and our desire to push the envelope. Our focus is much more on the quality of the building/space, though, not what it looks like.

I guess the answer is YES: we can do 'style neutral' without selling out. How exactly can we do it?

Let us take a look at our Shaw Multi-family project as an example. We recently published a short blog entry about this project here

View from Kitchen to Living and Stair in Upper Unit

View from Kitchen to Living and Stair in Upper Unit

While the exterior of the building was a design challenge in itself, the true challenge was fitting four 2-bedroom luxury condos into it, while maintaining design and spatial quality. Our strategy was to try to produce clean simple spaces, with lots of natural light, tall ceilings, functional, elegant interior layouts, no matter what our client wanted them to look like.

View from Kitchen to Living and Dining area in Lower Unit

View from Kitchen to Living and Dining area in Lower Unit

The only way to fit 4 units into this building was to create open floor plans, with open kitchens and undefined living spaces. These were not going to be traditional apartments... The size of the units and the desire to maximize their perceived spaciousness also dictated that the railings on the stairs should be as open as possible, that our material palate should be simple and light-handed, and that our fixture selections should reinforce that. These are all non-traditional moves. Dark colors were selected for windows, railings, fixtures, adding consistency and  a light handed industrial mood, again non-traditional. That mood is a carryover from the building's exterior, where red brick meets black steel bay window was our concept for merging old and new. The apartments in this building were never going to be anything but of this day, even if we tried otherwise.

View from Kitchen to Entry, Dining and Living areas in Lower Unit

View from Kitchen to Entry, Dining and Living areas in Lower Unit

Fitting the units into the building predisposed many other aspects. The difficulty of this task made style a non-issue. First and foremost, we had to solve the problem! 

The biggest design challenge was reconciling the program of requirements for the units and the open floor plans with the old building's inherent quirks and unusual footprint. Ultimately, the problem became the solution. We used the building's quirks as a guide by locating dining areas in the buildings bay windows when possible, and setting the stage with an attractive, timeless pendant light fixture over them, immediately gave the spaces a sense of 'timeless elegance.' Configuring the living room seating in the area adjacent to the new upper level French (not sliding) doors onto the balconies did the same for that space. Locating these functions strategically introduced a dash of formality back into the spaces, and, again, that timeless elegance we were looking for. Secondary spaces fell into place, and we even ended up with a decent amount of modularity in kitchen and bathroom layouts.

Finish selections fell quickly into place: walnut hardwood floors, timeless white and grey marble countertops and backsplashes in the kitchen, grey and white marble tile in the bathrooms. A light cove around the perimeter of the living spaces evokes crown moldings often found in buildings from the time period this one was built in without being too literal.

Little by little, the project developed its own aesthetic; its own 'text.' It fell into place without us having to force an aesthetic onto it. Is it conservative, or elegant? Is it timeless? Hopefully it is whole and true to itself.

 

 

Can you read it?

Post by Catarina Ferreira, AIA

At archi-TEXTUAL we like to refer to a project's set of conditions and constraints as 'TEXT.' What exactly do we mean? 

Design for us is about synthesis, much like writing a research paper. First we observe, we gather information,  we learn about the subject (site, building, client, etc). Slowly a gestural, common sense response to the text emerges. You could call it a thesis of sorts, or, as many architects refer to it, a parti. From there, various elements start falling into place and reinforcing that thesis, so that what emerges in the end is clear, coherent and legible. That is our goal. Do we actually pull it off?

Let's use our recently completed Annapolis Renovation project as case study.

The existing 1974 house, in an heavily wooded site in Annapolis MD, had great text already: thoroughly a 1970's Brady Bunch type modern, with the carpeted stairs, the sunken conversation pit, the vertical (drab) grey painted cedar siding. It could only get more interesting.

the house pre-surgery, w/ garage in front

the house pre-surgery, w/ garage in front

the previous stair

the previous stair

the space now occupied by a vestibule

the space now occupied by a vestibule

Our clients were interested in maintaining the flair of the house, while addressing its perceived problems: the heaviness of the roof lines, the awkward entrance between two volumes, under a bridge, and the visual lack of a proper front door (the garage was the welcoming committee) , the outdated interior spaces, the structural issues, etc. The house had many problems... the budget was tight (as always!). What could we do? In addition to addressing all of these problems, our clients also had a very green agenda.

In order to maximize the bang for the buck while addressing the various issues listed above, we decided to use surgery as a strategy. Roofs were lifted in strategic portions of the house, dramatically change it's massing and creating more open living spaces and master suite, for example; the two separate volumes were connected by a new entrance volume with a very welcoming front door; the dated staircase was replaced with a new one but the opening reaming unchanged, decreasing the need for structural alterations; the sunken conversation pit and hot tub removed, creating a larger, more open living room.

Other textual layers were added on: a love for the color red, glass railings, and raw black steel; a desire for a taller ceiling in the kitchen/dining area; a desire for an entrance that made a statement. A house with a distinct identity started to emerge during design development, and remained pretty much the same through completion, despite cost/value driven concessions.

What we ended up with in the end is perhaps more interesting than if we had designed a new house from scratch, and the old house is still there somewhere. Hopefully it speaks for itself, so I will now let the photos do the talking...

DSC_0059-13.jpg
DSC_0108-22.jpg

For more photographs of the finished house, go here.