I am picking an architect for a place I am building in Montana. Did the initial screening last week and am getting ready to call the references on the provisional first choice. One of the references the architect gave me is one of the builders they work with.
What would be some good questions to ask the builder about this architect? I.e., some potential problem areas / pitfalls that this particular architect got right or wrong.
Thanks,
DonH
Making mitered head casings is a breeze with this simple system.
"I have learned so much thanks to the searchable articles on the FHB website. I can confidently say that I expect to be a life-long subscriber." - M.K.
Dig into cutting-edge approaches and decades of proven solutions with total access to our experts and tradespeople.
Start Free Trial NowGet instant access to the latest developments in green building, research, and reports from the field.
Start Free Trial Now
Replies
Since you'll be asking questioins that might get back to him and could be interpreted as confrontational, be careful how you word things or you could be setting yourself up for a legacy of mistrust. But still be straight forward and honest.
"What are his strong points?"
"What are his weak points?"
"Do you like to work with him, and why?"
"What sets him apart from other architects, in your mind?"
"What, if anything wouild you like to inprove about your working relationship with him?"
Piffin,
Some good questions and pretty close to the ones I am using for the client references.
As far as confrontational. I was reasonably direct on the questions when I interviewed the architects, and I am sure he included the reference as a way to show that he does have good relationships with builders.
The main guy I don't want to turn off is the builder. (He'll get his turn :-))
Good pro's should be able to handle such things as long as they are done with respect. If a guy (or gal) can handle a few hard questions at the beginning of the process I am much less likely to question / 2nd-guess them when we are in the middle/end of the process.
Thanks,
DonH
You sound like a good man ( or woman...;>)) to work with!
Excellence is its own reward!
Only one question.
Did he do what he was paid to do?
Agreements between parties can be as different as nite and day.
Just make sure YOU know what you want and put it in the agreement.
Gabe
Don - I think that the fact that the architect gave a builder reference is, in itself, a good sign. You might ask how many projects they've worked on together - one particular project might have gone smoothly only by coincidence. Also:
What was the architect's approach to constructibility - does the architect respect the building process? Were the documents adequate to build the project without a lot of guessing?
Was the architect responsive during construction, providing sketches for clarification and additional dimensions as needed? Did the architect participate as an active partner in resolving conflicts? Were there any serious conflicts in documentation?
Did the architect have a sense of timeliness, understanding lead time and the need to be an active participant in seeing that decisions get made in time?
Did the architect's original schedule and budget estimate correspond roughly to the final schedule and budget? Was project closeout and punchlist handled in a professional manner?
(BTW piffin - doesn't say it's a "He" - we do have females in the profession, you know :o))
T. Jeffery Clarke
Excellent questions, Jeff.
Thanks,
DonH
Ne conjugare nobiscum
or maybe
Semper Letteris Mandate
Edited 7/2/2002 4:36:15 PM ET by DonH
Edited 7/2/2002 4:37:05 PM ET by DonH
Edited 7/2/2002 4:39:21 PM ET by DonH
At the risk of assuming the role of a devil's advocate, I don't agree with the general conscensus.
We're not interviewing a plumber to design your house.
An Architect is a licenced professional, trained in the design of various structures. You are hiring him or her to design a house which will end up being your home. You are buying a service at an agreed to rate per hour or for a total fixed price or a combination of both, to do this service for you.
Most arguements are as a result of a difference of opinion as to what was done for how much. In other words, you hire an architect to design your house. A set of drawings are produced for your approval. Once approved, copies are produced for you and your contractors to use.
This could be the end of the agreement or......
Your contractors can't read or understand the drawings as submitted. This could be as a result of poor drawing details or 2nd rate contractors who couldn't read the instructions on a big mac. Makes no nevermind.
You have a problem..........
The architect produced the drawings he was contracted to do. If you want to make further use of his services, someone has to pay. This is the beginnings of a disagreement which in some cases goes legal and in all cases leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouth.
If you have done the homework you say you have done, then you should know if you are satisfied with this architects work. I've never known anyone to supply references that would badmouth the applicant.
Now it's time to put the scope of work onto paper and agree to a fee.
The questions should be confined:
Mr. Architect, we have a picture or sketch of a house that we would like you to use as a guide to design out dream home.
These are the things we love about this house, these are the things we like about this house and these are the things we don't like about this house and finally these are the things we hate about this house.
We would like to have 3 preliminary sketches for us to review in x number of days. We would like x days to review and pick one with suggested revisions and meet with you for x hours to discuss our likes and dislikes. We would like to have a final set of conceptual sketches for us to approve prior to the final drawings being produced.
We would like to retain you for a further x hours to assist us in obtaining our permits.
We would like to retain you for a further x hours to meet with our builder and make him comfortable with the documents.
We would like to retain you for a further x hours to perform x site visits to verify the contractors work and to answer any questions.
We would like to invite you for a further x hours to attend our housewarming party.
Two words come to mind when I look to the hiring of professionals....respect and trust. Respect his or her profession and then trust them to do their work.
The defence rests.......
Gabe
Gabe,
I would expect a potential client to develope trust in me based initially on a combination of things, including their own instictive assesment of me and on reports from others who have worked with me on projects. You seem to point to specific contracturqal arrangements but I would not expect to get that far until they had made their assesments based on my references. That is what this guy is aiming for. Si?
Excellence is its own reward!
To continue on this path........
If this contractor that you are contacting to check out references is working hand in hand with this architect......what value would you assign to his or her comments, on a scale of 1 to 10?
When an architect comes to me with a proposal, which normally includes a portfolio of past work, I never call the references listed. I investigate the work done, instead. AND HERE LIES THE DIFFERENCE I've got the experience and ability to KNOW THE WORK LISTED AND BE ABLE TO MAKE A GOOD JUDGEMENT CALL. Most home owners do not have that luxury and have to rely on instinct and a good contract.
If I were looking for a residential architect, I would look for homes in the same quality, size and value that I was wanting for myself.
In the grand scheme of things, designing a house is not rocket science for the average architect.
To hire anyone based on degree and instinct may be a risk, but to hire anyone without a clear and precise written scope of work is lunacy and an open invitation to a court room.
Defence rests......
Gabe
"If this contractor that you are contacting to check out references is working hand in hand with this architect......what value would you assign to his or her comments, on a scale of 1 to 10?"
Very good points all, Gabe. An arch and builder in collusion COULD screw a client after giving each other glowing recommendations. In my mind, the questions I posed were meant to be a jumping off point for reading the responses given - initiation to discussion rather than right or wrong with a point value. The discussion that would ensue is where the client can refine his instinctive or subjective opinions in the context of objective information.
For example, when redesigning a kitchen, I ask the wife, what do you like about this one and what do you not like...
I'm reading her attitude and passion or ambivalence as she answers as much as what she specificaly says. At the same time, I'm observing whether the husband is in agreement with her words, trying to override them, or pacing in the corner like a caged tiger.
So I'm not asking specific questions about how to design the kitchen. I'm asking open ended questions that let them express their thoughts, experiences and feelings on the matter. Their body english and reactions between one another tell me more than the words they use to answer. If I read them right, I may design a kitchen nothing like what they SAY they want, but one that satisfies them both beyond their dreams.
So ask open ended questions and LISTEN with more than your ears, then follow up.
Nothing wrong with anything you've said but the time for specifics is when you start to nail down the contract, after the decision which architect to use.
Excellence is its own reward!
Can he design a house that can actually be lived in? With kids and a dog? A roof that does not leak? Window that allow treatments that don't require you to flash the neighbors every time you get up? Enough storage space so you don't have to take a vow of poverty, disposing of your worldly goods, to live in your high end home?
Plumbing, HVAC and electrical access, chases, attics and crawl spaces or some reasonable alternative, that will allow repairs and upgrades without having to rebuild the house? Enough counter space and cabinets, logically placed, to allow real cooking for a family? Rooms that don't have the intimacy of an aircraft hanger?
These seem to be major problems for most architect to overcome because so few seem to manage it. Oos and ahhs are great for about 3 months. Sight lines and aesthetics only get you so far. The other 49 years and 9 months you have to live with it or foist it off on some sucker.
If person designing the home calls him or herself an architect then those issues you brought up would not be present. Architects don't just draw pretty pictures. They have extensive training on how a structure fits together the best and most effective way. I don't know where you have had experience with these problems, but I bet that an architect was not involved with the project, if there was, then his or her license should be revoked.
I have helped wire three houses designed and supervised by architects. These were architects not builders and very proud to let you know this fact. One house was being built by the architect as his family house.
Of these not one met all of the simple requirements I set out and each of them fail, IMHO, on at least half of these issues. Two of them graced the pages of at least one of the more popular architectural magazines. The HO were proud of this and used it to their advantage when foisting this off on the next sucker in line. All of them are beautiful to behold with striking vistas and sightlines. Finely proportioned and tastefully decorated they would fit in well with any of the better glossy magazines.
As machines for living I feel each was a failure and I take no pride in having worked on them. Pretty failures but failures none the less.
What does wiring have to do with architecture? Isn't that the electricians or electrical engineers job? What aspects failed? Were the designs difficult to wire or was there inadequate plans? I am not sure what you are saying.
Most houses, at least the conventional or traditional ones, have adequate access built into the design. Attics, basements and crawl spaces provide a method for a tradesman to get to most building components, walls, floors and ceilings, so that additions and repairs can be accomplished without having to damage finish surfaces. This lowers the cost to the HO and makes upgrades cost effective. This happens, largely, without any thought by the designer as these access features are imbedded within the established norms of the conventional form.
As houses become more highly designed many of the hidden virtues or the traditional designs are lost. Cathedral ceilings remove the attics and a valuable method of running new wires, pipes, etc. These combined with an OGS (On Ground Slab) can leave entire sections of a house inaccessible. They can be, for the most part, easily wired and plumbed before the interior finish walls and ceilings are applied but once completed any further changes can be quite an ordeal.
The fact is that mechanical and electrical services wear out, become damaged and need to be upgraded regularly and access to these systems can greatly effect the cost of upgrades and repairs. Telling a HO that a dedicated computer circuit, a good idea, can be added to her home just as soon as we knock a few large sections out of the rosewood paneling or collecting on the bill produced by spending the time not opening up the paneling can be tricky.
Had the architect provided a few chases for utilities to be run the problem would be a small one and the bill much smaller. Some, a very few, architects understand this and include access both for the utilities themselves and the tradesmen who must do the work. They are truly saints of their profession in providing features that lower the long term cost of ownership and the longevity of their design.
Sometimes an electrician can help things along. Wiring sections in conduit can greatly simplify things in the future but there are limits to what can be accomplished this way. I have had some limited success talking HO into the added expense of some of these but in the end it is usually just a band-aid for a larger problem. A problem that may not show for many years.
These are exactly the things that architects and contractors from the various trades should get together and talk about. More collaboration between these trades to me is critical. A collaborative effort can only make things work more smoothly and ultimately cost less for the homeowner and less time for the trades. Thank you for your cander. I hope that my generation of architects can see the real value of working with contractors instead of fighting good working knowlege.
one thing that I find incessantly maddening about electrical plans from archs is the placement of can lights. It usually takes about three houses messed up or three loud arguments to get them to understand that the time for locating where these will go is before framing materials are ordered. I cannot install a can light in a specific location after I have already framed the place with TJIs. I need those spots identified so I can shift the layout around them before doing the framing.
Feels better to have that off my chest!
Excellence is its own reward!
I haven't run across the acronym TJI before but I assume you are referring to the trusses.
I feel your pain. The interaction, or failure to, of proscribed high hat fixtures and the framing is a constant source of friction. On one house we hung the lights 3 and 4 times each trying to please the HO. The original lighting plan was completely unworkable. The trusses have to be designed around the lighting diagram if the lighting design is to be followed. Using AutoCAD this is not any great feat if a small demonstration by a friendly architect is any indication.
I once threatened to chainsaw out the offending truss to hang the lights. The general was not amused.
TJI is the laminated three peice Truss-Joist I truss.Excellence is its own reward!
I truss that you meant I-Joist! I usually don't get yelled at because I don't like can lights. Lots of holes, not enough light and what's wrong with FIXTURES, dammit?T. Jeffery Clarke
Quidvis Recte Factum Quamvis Humile Praeclarum
I love fixtures, but most of the customers and designers seem to like cans, especially in Kitchen, utility, and hall spaces. Had a big run on wall wash trims a few years ago, centered on this space here, of course.Excellence is its own reward!
Training does not an architect make.
I have built from plans of at least a dozen "architects"
Only about half of them mange to perform more than an adequate job.
About a third of them had more in common with con artists than the building professions.
Excellence is its own reward!
Piffin, I can't aggree with you more! Training does not make an architect if the training is inadequate. I am an architect in training, and my background is in construction, so I know the headaches of working with bad or incomplete plans. Part of the reason that I wanted to become an architect is so I could bring back the integrity of designing a building that could actually be built. I hear contractors complain all the time that designs are too complicated or incomplete. I am striving to provide the complete set of plans. Too many architects that design houses especially, provide sets of plans that are more like the plans that you order through some magazine. These are incomplete and thoughtless in nature. I believe that the architect should know exactly how the building will assemble and his or her set of plans should spell that out. The contractor should not have to request further information to build the house, it should all be there. I hate to admit it about our profession, but I think that many architects have become lazy and content in performing there duties. I want to change that. We used to be considered master builders. We designed the building then we built it. That may not exactly work in this day and age, but I think that if we can get over our petty differences and work together utilizing each of our own skills, that together architects and contractors could accomplish a whole lot more and in less time, which means more money for both parties. Well that is my opinion.
"If this contractor that you are contacting to check out references is working hand in hand with this architect......what value would you assign to his or her comments, on a scale of 1 to 10?"
If I liked the results (which was a another good point you made in this thread), I would give it a 10 (assuming 10 is the good end of the scale). Maybe its because they were buds since grade school, but if they can work together, that is good. I would even tend to give some level of preference to that particular team when I picked the builder (assuming the other aspects made business sense).
And, I have already looked at a few of the houses this archtect has built and no real issues there.
BTW, as a natural course of selecting builders I will have a chance to talk with ones who were not on the architect's list. It is a small town and this is an established architect, so I will have plenty of independent feedback.
Edited 7/3/2002 11:18:19 AM ET by DonH
"It is a small town and this is an established architect, so I will have plenty of independent feedback."
Pray tell........Why did you take the long road with all the curves instead of the short straight one?
Just curious........How many sq. ft. are you planning and what style?
Gabe
"Pray tell........Why did you take the long road with all the curves instead of the short straight one?"
You're actually a Zen Master, right?
Could make a comment about perferring the senic route, but really, I don't see the road as that long. Took a few hours of my time to get and check the references (which I enjoyed) and some really interesting discussion on this list.
House will probably be about 2k sq/ft. But that is mostly just a target. Design will be driven around function and budget.
Style. Hmmm. Post-modern contemporary with elements based on the local vernacular. :-)
DonH
Touchee....
It takes 9 months for a woman to bear a child, regardless of how many women you assign the task to.
Time management is based on the fact that certain task take a fixed time to perform and there's nothing you can do about it. The success of managing time is knowing what can be done more efficiently and what can't.
I always use the short straight route whenever possible.
Gabe
Gabe wrote: "To hire anyone based on degree and instinct may be a risk, but to hire anyone without a clear and precise written scope of work is lunacy and an open invitation to a court room."
Most of the time, architects are hired with an understanding that what they are to provide the Owner are what the profession calls "Basic Services." If you are using an AIA Owner-Architect Agreement (and you should - the Architect is virtually required to do so by insurance companies) Basic Services will be spelled out clearly, including the Design, Construction Documents, Bidding/Negotiation and Construction Phases. Architects should NOT be presented with a list of "I want you to do this and not that" but should be hired to provide the professional services required. In many cases the homeowner is not best qualified to judge which services are needed and which are not. For instance, without knowing who the builder might be, the Architect and Owner would be foolish to strike the Architect's construction observation services. An Owner might express himself/herself by saying "I'd like to hold the cost down during construction by limiting your site visits to once a month" if the capability of the Contractor is known, but eliminating the Architect from the Construction Phase is foolish.
In general, the Architect is going to assume, unless stated otherwise in the interview process, that it is Basic Services that will be provided.T. Jeffery Clarke
Quidvis Recte Factum Quamvis Humile Praeclarum
Jeff,
If the contract was between you and I (you being an architect and my being a project manager), there would already be an understanding of what services would be the norm.
For a regular home owner I would disagree on the expectations and understandings of the services normally rendered and their respective values.
For the sake of clarity and peace of mind, nothing beats a simple scope of work, written on one page, outlining the services proposed and the costs of any changes to this original document.
You or I would never consider hiring any contractor to build a house if we didn't have a clear understanding of what his price included and what changes would cost.
By the same token, if I hire a sub to do a 100,000 dollar project, it will be required that he sign a full CCDC long form contract BUT if it's only a 10,000 dollar service then it will be done on a single page PO with a scope of work attached.
Everything is relative and each situation should be a assessed on it's own merits.
I did 8 years of case prep for construction litigation and 90% could have been avoided by simple clarity prior to commencement of work.
Gabe
Gabe - I don't disagree with you at all, and the points you make are why I write a proposal to every prospect after meeting with them. The proposal details the services to be matched to their needs and includes examples of work. It gets attached to the Owner-Architect Agreement. Such a proposal should serve as a comparison point to other professionals, if there is a selection to be made. Perhaps this leads to a last bit of advice - get a written proposal for services before deciding on an architect.T. Jeffery Clarke
Quidvis Recte Factum Quamvis Humile Praeclarum
Absolutely, I agree with you.
BTW How about posting some shots of that 1920 arts and crafts that you've been working on.
I for one would love to see before and after shots as well as details.
Gabe
Don.......Gabe is right! No matter how "good" you feel with the Architect or how responsive the builders or contractors are regarding working with this Architect, you'll end up with a contract that states, "Who does what to whom for how much and how long!"
You don't want to end up in the middle of Designer/Builder/Subs pointing fingers at each other trying to place blame. If the Architect hangs his reputation on "pretty pictures" and is not particular about "the contract", I think I'd look elsewhere.Johnny On The Beach...........
"you'll end up with a contract that states, "Who does what to whom for how much and how long!"
It is undoubtedly true that the terms of the contract will have a great impact on everybody's satisfaction at the end of the job. A good contract puts everyone's expectations on paper where they can be easily compared with reality. But what happens if one of the parties does not live up to the contract? It is possible to fight this out in court, but then everyone is a loser. Finding out as much as you can about anyone you are hiring, be they an architect, a builder, a subcontractor, or anyone else who provides a service, is always a good idea. If nothing else, the information that you glean from this builder reference can help you to write a contract that buys the services that this architect does well and does not include services that the architect does poorly. For instance, there are a couple of architects in our area who do a great job working with the client and providing a good design, but who are terrible at supervising a job or providing timely drawings during the construction phase.
Hmm, some good points, but am still trying to understand where you are coming from.
First off, I would disagree strongly that the architectural process is as cut and dried as you described. Licensing does not guarantee (or really have any real correlation) with excellence (I like Piffin's tag line). It ensures a certain limited level of competency. But that is all. To take that even further, it mostly focuses on the "mechanical" side of an architect's job. Says nothing about the creative process that that person uses and how he/she (:-)) collaborates with the client and builder. These are personal attributes that are not tested in the licensing process.
Now I agree that the usual reference checking falls short in many ways, since we expect only the good relationships to show up on the list. But with the proper encouragement, I was able to draw out reasonably well how the "soft" side of the process worked with with a particular client. I will drawn my own conclusion as to whether that particular process will work for me, but it is good to hear a viewpoint in addition to that offered by the architect.
You conclude with a very good point about respect and trust. Are you suggesting that a thorough examination of references is counter to that? If so, would have to disagree there also. Certainly I have been similarly (and even more thoroughly) examined in my professional life and didn't feel the least bit dissed. I am a wimp relative to some of the venture capital folks.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply,
DonH
A devil's advocate doesn't have to come from anywhere, only to make others think.
If you were hiring a lawyer, licensed in the state or province that you live in, to practise criminal law for the past 10 years, would you give much thought to his references if you were trying to beat a jay walking rap on a principal?
I'm sorry but, designing a house, even a 5 million dollar house, is not rocket science to most architects experienced in home designing.
If, I'm reading between the lines accurately, you already know more about him or her than most people would have bothered to investigate.
I'm going to break away from the role of devil's advocate for a moment.
The success of any major project is based on knowing what you want, being able to communicate what you want, and having the confidence to get what you want done in a timely fashion.
Nothing destroys a project faster than delays caused by indecision.
Back to the devil's advocate.
You are not interviewing for a life partner, you are buying a skill or a service, period. Now that you've found an architect that possesses those skills, hire his services and spell them out in writing.
Use your time wisely and begin focusing on getting what you want designed and built.
BTW when you were supplying references, ever include someone who felt cheated by you, even if you hadn't?
Gabe
I think I am starting to understand (at least one) your point(s). If I might paraphrase and over-simplify: Once you have chosen the professional, make sure you have a good contractual relationship. You should have appreciated, then, one of the tag lines I used earlier in the thread:
Semper Letteris Mandate
No disagreement there...
Sometimes points are best made during an argument with control.
The main point that should be discussed is readiness. Are you ready to build? Do you know what you want to build? Do you appreciate that time is money to all concerned? Can you afford to build for cost effectiveness?
Gabe
You are very right.
The contract spells out the minimum required. When I work with a client that I like (i.e. I respect them and they in turn respect me) I go beyond the language of the contract to insure that my client gets the project they desire. At the start of a job I tell the contractor that we are a team with a common goal. Our job is to work together to satisfy "OUR CLIENT". It is not my client or his client but ours. We both work for him or her. I use contractors as references all of the time because I provide answers to the contractors questions ASAP and help keep the problems to a minimum. Trust and respect are a cornerstone to a successful project. I start out with trust but if you screw me and the client I always have the punch list
We have a slightly different way of looking at the relationship between the players involved in creating a project.
With us, it's not the "Client", it's the "Building" that is our mistress.
I'm part of a workforce that numbers over a thousand on our building. We are a team that caters to and ensures that the "Building" is the best structure in the country. We will do what is required to make absolutely sure that this is the case and no one will be allowed to stand alone to do it harm. We will never allow ourselves to be compromised into doing work not worthy of our mistress.
Gabe
If you can afford an architect for a custom home, then expect to pay dearly. For a modern home, a basic no frills set of plans for a 1600 Sq Ft house might be 10K.
Questions I would ask the contractor is... Was the architect too whimsical with design? ...a very irregular roof here and a major engineering feat to make some dream come true at your expense there. In other words was he or she builder friendly? I like great effects with ease of construction.
One thing the architect is usually off on is the stair opening. Was there enough headroom and width?
Are the mechanical aspects of the job well integrated and stacked nicely or are there gas, water and heating lines going every which way cattywhompus?.
Does the architect have a structural engineer on hand?
Itemized window and door schedules are not always included. Framing and trim takeoffs would also be nice but I'm dreaming now.
In Montana you may have heavy snow load and freezing #### conditions. If the Architect is not local then you may have 12 foot icicles hanging over your front door and snow unloading big dumps from your roof to your driveway where you have to remove it all because the San Francisco design worked well there.
Have a very clear idea of what you want before you consult the architect. Have a basic footprint of the house and orientation in mind while saving trees and maximizing views. Think about things like.. Where do you want your kitchen window so the morning light can reach you?
Mike
Don,
has the architect given you any past client references? to whit, are they happy? why? how were the architect and client introduced? was it a project for a friend, family member...? catch my drift? in the end, all contracts aside, ask the clients if they would recommend this architect. isn't this the bottom line?
mac
Yep, gave client references also. And I agree, "Would you hire this person again?" is the best question you can ask if you only get one.
One tip in any reference interview is to never ask a question with an obvious "wrong" answer. Since references were selected to say nice things about the professional in question, they will never give that answer. The main goal is to get the reference to talk at length about projects they worked on with the professional.
Listen, steer the conversation a bit, and appeal to their ego (which keeps them talking and perhaps less guarded in what they say), and one wil usually get enough information to know if more independent checking is needed. (That being said, the reference calls all went well with this architect.)
Obviously, reference checking is not the be all or end all of the selection process, but I am certainly not going to short it.
Thanks,
DonH
Edited 7/3/2002 11:03:26 AM ET by DonH
First off, thanks for everyone's time contributing to the thread. The answers were quite useful to me and I finished my calls off this morning. (And will be starting the conceptual phase with the architect soon.)
One particulary interesting discussion came up in this thread that got me to wondering... Gabe and other empahsized the importance of a good contractual relationship between client, architect and builder. Now being mostly a city boy, this has always been the way I worked. But there were some interesting discussions in prior threads about builders not liking the "over-specified" proposals they received from some architects. Or builders who did not appreciate being fenced in by an air-tight contract that they felt second-guessed their professionalism. I am going to venture that such feeling might be even stronger in Montana that say California or back east.
I will stick with the advice offered (Since that is my tendency anyway, being one of those dreaded Engineers. (Although I am a software engineer, and we all know that they are not obsessed with detail:-))), but wonder if I am going to run into issues down the road.
DonH
Edited 7/3/2002 11:33:15 AM ET by DonH
There are several architects I love and don't love..My own personal taste. I ask the architects that I want to consider what they think of ones I have my own personal opinions about. I love the work that Robert A.M Stern does (see my website below) I DONT like Frank Lloyd Wright (sorry).....Its important to me to hear the opinions of an archiitect I'm considering because it reflects serious interest in my own personal taste
Be well
Namaste'
Andy
It's not who's right, it's who's left ~ http://CLIFFORDRENOVATIONS.COM