Letter to a Potential Client

I was recently approached via email by a potential new client for a house.  This person had seen something I had posted online, but was not very familiar with my work, my design process, or the type of architectural services that I offer.

For most of my professional life thus far, I have worked for other architects (some very good ones, in fact) but have always done my own projects on the side also.  These have primarily come through friends, friends-of-friends, associates, or family.  It has been a long time since I had the opportunity to compose a thorough description of what I do, for the benefit of someone I didn't know well and had not had the opportunity to meet in person.

Here is what I wrote, with some very minor edits:

Dear _______

Great to hear from you.  I am very interested in helping you with your project.  Let me describe how I usually work, and ask you some basic questions about your goals, objectives, and intentions for your new home.

If I were to design you a house, it would be a custom, one-of-a-kind creation.  My goal is that every project is both integrated with its site and reflective of the owner's requirements & desires.  The various attributes of the site are crucial.  For example, are there views?  Are there neighboring houses or other structures close by?  Is it a confined city lot, or on some acreage?  Perhaps the site has special features such as a mature shade tree(s) or steep slope to be accounted for.  The movement of the sun relative to the property also has some impact on the design, as does the climate in general. 

Second, I would want to know more about you and your goals and desires for the way you want to live.  Do you live alone?  Partner/spouse?  Kids?  Pets?  And a host of other things, which we could talk over at the appropriate points in the design process.

Finally, I always aim to keep the budget in mind.  I could design a very nice, modern house of the size you describe, of simple wood frame construction, with perhaps one or two specially designed, customized touches like a fireplace or library wall, to suit a modest budget.  Alternatively, I could design a house of the same size that would be a modernist tour de force, of wood, steel, and glass, complete with custom furnishings, at 3-4x the cost.  Keeping the design appropriate to the budget is very important.

My usual approach, once an agreement has been reached as to the fees, general time line, and other particulars of our working relationship, would be to develop a basic schematic design first (or perhaps 2 or 3 different schemes, depending on the project and its complexity,) then after client approval, proceed to develop the scheme more fully.  Once the developed scheme is approved, I would move forward with turning it into construction documents.   This whole process usually takes 4-6 months. 

Then, during the construction process, I like to be as involved as possible or practical, depending on where the project is located.  A lot of little refinements are made during the construction process.  Did you see the lake house I designed in Indiana, on my web site? Here's the link:  http://bit.ly/aGyVLm  One of the reasons it was so successful was that I was able to visit frequently during the framing stage, and keep the contractor on track.  Traditionally, the role of the architect is not only to provide a design, but to help the owner with issues of quality control during construction, and to ensure that the design intent is being executed faithfully by the contractor.

So: With all of that being said, my first questions for you would be:

1. Do you have a specific lot or piece of property in mind for the house? 
2. What is the budget you had in mind?
3. Related to #2 -- do you have a contractor in mind, or lined up?  If so, have you discussed price with them?  Usually they want to see some plans before they will get very specific about the price, but they should be able to give you some sense of price per square foot for your area. 
4. Where would the house be built?  I am in Los Angeles, but am not fazed in the least by working long-distance. Again, the lake house in Indiana is a great example.  I happen to be working on a new design for that same client, to be built in East Tennessee, about halfway between Knoxville and Chattanooga, on 28 acres.

I have not typically been in the business of just selling floor plans, since I am really interested in the creation of something unique for each project, because every combination of client and site is totally different.  I know there are lots of websites that offer this type of service, with lots of plans to choose from.  I just wouldn't know how to do that.

However, this description of my services is what I would consider the "norm" or "ideal", but as I also said, each client's situation is different.  It is more important to me that you want to work with me because you like my work, and you like what I have written about how I work.  If you feel that we would be a good fit, I would be more than happy to put together a package of services to suit your needs.

Best regards,

Earl Parson
Architect

A Small Lesson in Leadership

Today we have a true anecdote that illustrates a lesson in leadership.

The other day at the gym, after finishing up my workout, I headed into the steam room to stretch a little bit and warm down before heading home. There was no one else in there, but another guy came in just a moment later. We'll call him "the Slob". He went and sat down on one of the benches. A couple of minutes later, a third guy came in. We'll call him "the Other Guy". He sat down and we were all minding our own business.

I was stretching and touching my toes, and couldn't see what happened next, but the audio was utterly disgusting.

I clearly heard a complete, four-part SNORT -- HACK -- SPIT -- SPLAT!

It came from the direction of the Slob.

Generally, if someone so much as coughs in the steam room, I head for the door. I don't get all in peoples' faces for coughing, since I know that sometimes a lungfull of steam can go down wrong or get caught in your throat and trigger an uncontrollable cough. I just don't want to hang around in that newly-germ-laiden air.

At this point, I was not about to hang around in there after the Slob's unbelievably crass display. But what came screeching to my conscious mind in the split second before I headed towards the door was that this guy needed to be called out on his behavior. I looked up and my gaze went from the Slob to the Other Guy.  We were looking at each other, both with the same look of disbelief that said, "did that guy really just spit in here?"

I spoke up. "Did you just spit in here?"

The Other Guy followed immediately with "Yeah, did you just spit in here?"

And what do you think happened next? Did the Slob apologize? Leave the room in embarrassment? Act with any contrition at all? Amazingly, none of the above. Rather, he got defensive and belligerent. Defensive and belligerent! It actually turned into an argument!

See why I called him "the Slob"?

After a few moments of arguing about the appropriateness of spitting in the steam room (!), during which the Other Guy and I were completely unable to convince the Slob of the inappropriateness of his behavior, the Other Guy said, "That's it. I'm reporting this to the front desk." He stormed out and I followed him, not really sure where this was all going to end up, but just kind of automatically.  I certainly wasn't going to hang around with the Slob any longer, and the Other Guy might need backup.  Plus, I wanted to complain to management too, given the argument and all.  I wasn't sure whether he was going to march all the way to the front desk right then and there -- it seemed like he was maybe going to.  He was in his swimsuit, but I was only in a towel.  Anyway, off we went to complain to someone.

Often, there will be someone on staff in the locker room, whether they're just in there to use the restroom or whatnot, but at this point none was in there.  Then the Other Guy went to the phone on the wall, right next to the entrance from the main gym. I've always seen that phone but never seen anyone use it. There was a slightly comedic moment when he went to pick up the receiver. There are no instructions or anything with the phone, no sign reading "To report a spitting incident, dial '0' for an operator". It's just a phone with a keypad and some different line buttons on it. He stared at it for a second, shrugged, dialed '0' and said "Front desk? I want to report an incident. A guy just spit in the steam room..." He described the Slob, what he looked like, what kind of shorts he was wearing, etc. He told the front desk peopleguy that he had just seen the perp leave the steam room and out towards the pool. Then he said, "If you don't believe me, here's another guy who witnessed it too; talk to him" and he handed me the phone and walked away.

I took the phone and confirmed what he had said, and told them that they should throw the guy out, or at least deal with it in some way because it was completely unacceptable.  In the end, I don't know whether they threw him out or exactly what happened.  I got dressed and left, and I think the Other Guy did the same.

But here are the lessons I took away from the incident:

1. When you see something going on that isn't right, say something. Make the effort. Take a moment to bring it to someone's attention (preferably someone in a position to do something about it.) You never know when your action might inspire someone else to take action and join your effort. If I hadn't spoken out, it's quite possible that the Other Guy wouldn't have spoken out either. I certainly hadn't planned on calling the front desk. Yet, by my speaking out, the Other Guy was inspired to take even further action on the matter than I would have done.

Also, I really like my gym, and I don't want it to be the kind of place that this sort of thing can go on.  The management and staff work really hard to make it a nice place for people to work out and improve their well being, and I don't want people like the Slob bringing it down.  Hopefully the Slob will have learned some manners, although this seems dubious to me.

2. Upon further reflection, I came up with the concept of the Threshold of Outrage. People hold their own standards of what is acceptable, what is unacceptable but not worth worrying about or mentioning, and what is beyond the pale. I find that lately I have been lowering my own T of O, and it has had a lot of benefit. Especially when I can see that I do have a positive impact on things when I make the effort.

By lowering your threshold of outrage, and making the effort to speak out, one exhibits leadership - a quality that is in desperately short supply these days.

Now, go forth and speak your mind, and feel free to do so in the comments below!

A Bit of Cuteness, Courtesy of P + T

Just a quick one to report that Paul has had his stitches out and is 100% back to normal.

(In case you missed it, we were attacked by a loose dog on our walk, about 2 weeks ago.)

Because he was such a good boy through the whole thing, including having to wear the dreaded Cone of Shame, he got a new toy:

A stuffed bunny from the thrift store!

The Bunny Gets It!

More cuteness:

That was last Thanksgiving when we were using the front yard as the living room.

Todd was great with the moral support!

and finally:

Paul says, "Thanks, everyone!"

Mohammed Boobquake Cartoon

Recently, over at Free Colorado, Ari Armstrong posted an excellent piece on censorship and the First Amendment.  After describing how Comedy Central caved and censored a recent South Park episode, he wrote:

Thankfully, not all Americans are prepared to cower in some corner as terrorist goons shred the First Amendment and impose theocratic censorship. Some Americans are taking a stand.

Dan Savage proposed May 20 as "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day." This idea has been picked up by Michael Moynihan at Reason and Allahpundit at Hotair.

I propose only a slight modification to the plan: to protest death threats made by freedom-hating terrorists, Americans should draw Mohammed -- and publish their drawings -- by May 20.

I was all set to draw up a little Mohammed cartoon and put it up in time for the event.

Then, from out of nowhere, we had the BoobQuake!  Recently, an Iranian prayer leader scolded women who dressed immodestly, claiming that it was the cause of earthquakes.  One Jennifer McCreight blogged about it and then created a Facebook event around the idea, saying:

Time for a Boobqauke.

On Monday, April 26th, I will wear the most cleavage-showing shirt I own. Yes, the one usually reserved for a night on the town. I encourage other female skeptics to join me and embrace the supposed supernatural power of their breasts. Or short shorts, if that's your preferred form of immodesty. With the power of our scandalous bodies combined, we should surely produce an earthquake. If not, I'm sure Sedighi can come up with a rational explanation for why the ground didn't rumble. And if we really get through to him, maybe it'll be one involving plate tectonics.

So, who's with me? I may be a D cup, but that will probably only produce a slight tremor on its own. If you'll be joining me on twitter, use the tag #boobquake! 

She wrote up a more lengthy explanation on her blog here.   You can also read a quick summary over on Mashable, which is where I first discovered it.  I encourage you to join the Facebook group if you haven't already.

There is so much to love about the whole BoobQuake phenomenon (even for a gay guy like me!)  I normally wouldn't consider such an absurd statement out of Iran to merit the dignity of any response at all.  Yet, to meet it with such an off-the-cuff, sarcastic bit of silliness, and then to have that response take off like wildfire, like a mass demonstration, like a virtual taking to the streets of women with their cleavage -- the whole thing just restores my faith in humanity in so many ways.

When I was preparing my cartoon, I did a google image search under the cleric's name, Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi.  It was actually really hard to find a picture of the guy amid all the cleavage that came up!  WooHoo!

So, I figured it was time to draw that Mohammed cartoon early, and incorporate BoobQuake at the same time.  If I can't go running around showing immodest cleavage, I can at least do this.  (I am wearing a v-neck today, but it seemed pretty clear that it was womens' cleavage that caused the quakes.  Oh well.)

So, without further ado, here are Mohammed and Sedighi discussing the events of today.  Somehow my Mohammed looks a little Jesusey.  Oh well.  It's kind of hard to figure out how to show him that anyone would get who he was. 

Anyway, I hereby grant permission to reproduce the cartoon online, provided that a link is provided back to this post, and that the cartoon is presented unchanged.

This Week's Paleo Recipe: Pork in Yellow Curry

In an effort to expand my diet and get more nutritional variety from the foods I eat, I am going to post a weekly new paleo recipe here at C of P. 

The other day I was at Figueroa Produce, and, wanting to try something new, I picked up a 1-1/2 lb chunk of pork cushion meat.  It looked similar to a piece of beef chuck roast, in terms of size, shape, and fat percentage.  I figured I could at least throw it in the crock pot if I was out of time or didn't really want to spend that much effort worrying about it.  Turns out that the crock pot was an excellent choice.  

These diagrams explain a little more about where the cushion meat comes from on the pig.  It comes from the shoulder area, and is also called a 'picnic shoulder roast' or 'Boston butt'.  (I can't help but chuckle a little to myself on that last one!)

This one is from the National Pork Producers Council.

 

 Here is the diagram from Aus-Meat Limited (from Austrailia)

In the end, all I did was brown it on both sides in my cast-iron frying pan and throw it in the crockpot with a can of coconut milk.  I used about 2 tablespoons of this really great yellow curry paste I discovered, called Mae Ploy.  I think I over did it a bit on the curry, but you can easily adjust it to your taste.  Also, after browning, I always throw a little water (about 1/4 cup) in the frying pan and scrape up all the tasty bits that get stuck there.  I believe fancy chefs call this 'deglazing' the pan.  This gets added into the crock pot as well.

After I cooked it for 3-4 hours, I stirred it around and pulled it apart with a fork. Then I let it simmer for a couple more hours and voila!  It was really tender and delicious.  I ate it on a plate with greens, I ate it with fried eggs, I ate it cold with a spoon out of the tupperware!  (one of the advantages of living alone!)

Do you have a preparation method or recipe using Boston butt picnic cushion?  If so, let me know in the comments!

Cross-posted at Modern Paleo

Environmental Envy: The Manhatta Project

New York City stands today as the crowning achievement of Western Civilization.  It’s population density of 71,201 residents per square mile is only possible because of the technologies of modern life.  The City’s rise to a global metropolis, housing and sustaining millions of people, in such density, in a relatively high level of comfort, would be a complete shock to the Europeans who settled there in the early 17th Century.

Recently, the Wildlife Conservation Society unveiled The Manhatta Project, led by Dr. Eric Sanderson.  They had undertaken a 10-year study to re-create Manhattan as it existed in its wilderness state, prior to its relatively rapid conversion to the thriving metropolis of New York.  Their results are presented on their website, or you can buy the book.

This project immediately begs the question: What’s the point of trying to figure all this out?  Why go to all the trouble to spend 10 years reconstructing a pre-civilized Manhattan, their “Manhatta”?  Surely there must be many other places where they could study the primitive coastal ecology of the Mid-Atlantic region, where they wouldn’t have to go to nearly so much trouble.  Why choose the one location that is the most highly developed of all possible locations, to fixate on the stark contrast between the undeveloped and the developed?  This last phrasing of the question answers itself.

In fact, this type of investigation - the recreation of a pre-civilized Manhattan -  is completly consistent with the view of environmentalism presented by Craig Biddle, over at The Objective Standard:

The basic principle of environmentalism is that nature (i.e., “the environment”) has intrinsic value—value in and of itself, value apart from and irrespective of the requirements of human life—and that this value must be protected from its only adversary: man. Rivers must be left free to flow unimpeded by human dams, which divert natural flows, alter natural landscapes, and disrupt wildlife habitats. Glaciers must be left free to grow or shrink according to natural causes, but any human activity that might affect their size must be prohibited. Naturally generated carbon dioxide (such as that emitted by oceans and volcanoes) and naturally generated methane (such as that emitted by swamps and termites) may contribute to the greenhouse effect, but such gasses must not be produced by man. The globe may warm or cool naturally (e.g., via increases or decreases in sunspot activity), but man must not do anything to affect its temperature.

From this perspective, it makes perfect sense that the environmentalists would go to all this effort to present a detailed image of the erasure New York City, and of all it represents:  the crowning achievement of the most technologically advanced civilization to have ever existed.

What do they say about their motives?  From their own website:

But why go through so much trouble to find out such detailed information about natural features that are long gone? Well, as you may have guessed, we at the Wildlife Conservation Society are interested inconserving [sic] wildlife. We know that many animal species are faltering because humans have taken over what was once wildlife habitat, converting it to cities, suburbs, farms, roads, mining operations, and other human-dominated landscapes. Of all of these types of development, cities are the most efficient at housing people. That is, cities concentrate people into a relatively small area instead of spreading them across the landscape. From a wildlife conservation perspective, that makes cities the best option for housing people. With more and more of the human population moving to cities, with several mega-cities of 10 million people or more on the horizon, and with a growing urban sprawl development pattern in the USA and elsewhere, we realize that we have the opportunity to “do” cities a better way . . . minimizing sprawl development between cities where the ecological gems, the “Mannahattas” of today, currently reside.

So, the project is aimed at coming up with new arguments for why human progress should be stopped: why "cities, suburbs, farms, roads, mining operations, and other human-dominated landscapes" should be prevented from being built.  This is what they mean by “minimizing sprawl development.”  (Sprawl is a myth, but that is another essay.)

The lesson is:  Look how great “Manhatta” used to be, before the civilized Europeans fouled it all up.  You humans should just be concentrated in cities, and all land-use decisions will be based on what’s best for the animals who live there now.

And again:

This is not merely an academic flight of fancy. Rather, . . . we will learn how to create cities that are more “livable” for people.

The Mannahatta Project began a decade ago, when landscape ecologist Dr. Eric Sanderson, a native Californian, moved to New York City to work for the world famous Wildlife Conservation Society at the Bronx Zoo. Dr. Sanderson realized that, to fully appreciate the concrete landscape of streets and buildings that was his new home, he would have to “go back in time” to recreate the its ecology from the “ground up.”

I would suggest a different type of historical analysis by which one could undertake to better appreciate the urban landscape of New York, which might also shed some light on the types of innovations that would make the cities of the future "more 'livable' for people".

How about an historical search for the inventors of those things and processes that made the construction of the city possible: of Bessemer’s steel; of Otis’ revolutionary elevator; of Eiffel and his mastery of structural steel engineering; of John Smeaton, the first civil engineer and an early pioneer of modern concrete; of Pilkington and the Float Glass Process.  Or how about all the untold engineers, surveyors, and builders who enabled the rugged, untamed landscape to be civilized and built upon.  What of the thousands of inventors and innvoators who created devices and refinements based on the ground-breaking work of these great men, without any of which the city would have certainly been very different than it turned out to be, if not impossible altogether.

To ignore all of these great men and the technologies they invented - all, one way or another, in the name of human comfort -- and instead spend 10 years in search of a pre-civilized “Manhatta”, denuded of all traces of Modern Civilization, and then claim that this study is for the purpose of discovering “how to make cities more appealing to people” is a terrible injustice, and an insult to the efforts of these great geniuses.

In The Return of the Primitive,  Ayn Rand defined ‘envy’ as “the hatred of the good for being the good.”  The Manhatta Project illustrates the anti-civilizaton, anti-man agenda of the environmental movement as what can only be defined as “environmental envy”.

On April 22, I will be celebrating Exploit the Earth Day.  I will spend the day reading about and toasting the achievements of the Great Ones whose hard work has enabled the transformation of vast wilderness areas into our thriving, comfortable, modern society. 

I encourage you to do the same.

I Passed My CSE!

I have hit a major milestone.  Last Saturday I got the letter.

"Congratulations.  You have successfully completed your recent California Supplemental Examination with the California Architects Board.  Enclosed is an Application for Licensure."

Then, further down the page:

"As a reminder, pursuant to Business and Professions Code section 5336(a) you may not represent to the public that you are an architect, put out any device that might indicate to the public that you are qualified to engage in the practice of architecture, or perform any architectural services in California until you are licensed by this Board.  A violation of this section is a misdemeanor."

So, as it turns out, after all the years of school and internships, after passing the 9 exams administered by NCARB, and finally passing the CSE (also known as the Oral Exam, because it consists of being grilled by a panel of 3 architects for roughly 2 hours) I am still not qualified to practice architecture.  Sigh.  The license will be issued in 6-8 weeks.

Even though the license is not required to design single-family residences, it is required to be able to call yourself an architect.  Most states, including California, take this very seriously and enforce it vigorously.  I have always been careful about this, even including a clause in my standard contract that acknowledges that I am not a licensed architect.

It also has me feeling a little overwhelmed.  I think that is why it took me until today to reflect a bit on it here at the blog.  I have been gradually working towards this goal for nearly 30 years, which is a long time.  And now, here I am (well, almost.)  It is definitely time to step back, evaluate things, and make some decisions about what to do next.  The little things are obvious: keep working on the furniture designs, keep practicing my piano, keep writing it all in the blog.

But in the big picture, I need a new focus.  I want to grow my practice and build lots of fabulous houses, and I want to do a lot more writing about design and the practice of architecture.  I need to sit down and spend the time to formulate 5- and 10- year goals.

Also, I feel like I am at (or nearing)  decision point about whether or not to stay in California, and if not, where to go.  The regulatory regime in California (and LA specifically) is pretty iron-fisted; you end up spending huge amounts of time dealing with it, and virtually always to the detriment of the owner and/or the project (not to mention the heartburn and frustration it causes me.)  I have often found myself caught in between my client on the one hand, who wants nothing more than to finally realize a dream that they have been saving for, and working towards for years, or even decades, and now they have entrusted me with helping them to realize this dream; versus: a bottom-feeding bureaucrat who will only say "No, you can't do that" and is unwilling to provide a reason at all as to how or why the particular issue in question would cause a threat, nuisance, or harm to my client or anyone else.

I take my role of "dream realization agent" very seriously.  It is an honor to be chosen by someone to design a house for them.  It's not just designing a house - it is the creation of a shelter for their lives.  It is a tremendous thrill to be involved in such a positive expansion of the life of another.  And, I take property rights very, very seriously.  To have the government telling you what you can and cannot do with your property is a horrible perversion of the proper role of government.  Combine all this together, and you can probably see that I get very upset at some of the stuff I have to put up with, in order to practice my art.

And, I think I would be much happier, in the long run, if I were practicing in a place where the role of government in my day-to-day work life were more limited than it is here in Los Angeles, or in California.

I should also point out that, although I disagree with the regulation of my profession and the restriction of property rights perpetrated by the government, these are not worth being sanctioned by the State Board or getting thrown in jail.  I will practice within the law, whilst agitating for change.

I chose to become an architect, and am on the verge of finally realizing that goal.

Hooray for me!