#429 - MARINA’S 3 FAVORITE BUILDINGS
SUMMARY
This week David and Marina of FAME Architecture & Design discuss Marina’s 3 favorite buildings. They touched on Farnsworth House’s radical design; building code and modern architecture; Frank Lloyd Wright’s work; the Pompidou Centre; beauty in architecture; architecture juxtaposition; buildings in winter; and more. Enjoy!
TIMESTAMPS
(01:50) Marina's First Favorite Building.
“Why isn't more mid-century style development happening in Los Angeles, for example? These houses are so cool. A lot of people in California love them. They were built simply as a post and beam structure. Why don't we have more spec houses like that? It's because they're more expensive than the spec houses being built now because of how construction has evolved. A lot of mid-century houses do not meet today's criteria for building codes. The amount of glass in [the Farnsworth House] would be considered very expensive if you were to do it today and you'd have to have railings everywhere, which would destroy the look of this building. It would be completely different. It's easy for us all to romanticize older architecture but there's the reality that you couldn't do this now because it wouldn't be allowed.” (13:38)
(15:11) Building Code and Modern Architecture.
(18:51) Farnsworth House radical design
“What makes architecture, architecture? We have to enclose space to keep the elements out, so we're protected from the rain and the cold, but beyond that, the function of the home, aside from the core, comes from only the furniture. That's why I find it so strange when people want to divorce furniture and interior program from architecture… The idea that these are separate things or different professions is a very narrow-minded view of what architecture is.” (23:43)
(25:56) Marina's 2nd favorite building.
“Frank Lloyd Wright’s projects have an edge to them because he's trying things that don't quite work for construction reasons or sometimes even design reasons. They're a little bit sloppy. The relationship between two different components is filled with friction but that’s okay. [An analogy is] In music, you can play a piece perfectly, or you can play it with a bit of an edge, where things get a little bit out of control because you’re trying something. That's what we should be doing in architecture. In Frank Lloyd Wright's work, that's what it's exciting to me. I think that's also what made him well-known. If you just do things that are expected, nobody's going to care. You're not pushing anything anywhere.” (34:48)
(48:13) Marina's 3rd favorite building.
(59:43) Beauty in Architecture.
“There’s always been [this perception] in the society where anything industrial or utilitarian is not beautiful. People think that a building has to be of a certain genre [or style] in order for it to be beautiful. Why is that? I think what makes architects different from the general public is we understand that beauty can be found across different genres. When you are dealing with clients, oftentimes they are victims of those preconceptions. ” (01:02:25)
(01:11:19) Architecture juxtaposition.
(01:19:03) Buildings in Winter.
HAVE QUESTIONS OR SUGGESTIONS?
TEXT/CALL OUR HOTLINE
213-222-6950
#425 - WHAT MAKES A BUILDING BEAUTIFUL?
SUMMARY
This week David and Marina of FAME Architecture & Design discuss beauty in architecture. The two cover formulas for beauty in architecture; symmetry vs beauty; teaching beauty; style vs beauty; music and architecture; lighting; materials and textures; project context; movement; what makes a building beautiful; favorite beautiful buildings; and more. Enjoy!
TIMESTAMPS
(00:00) Beauty in Architecture.
“When you learn how to design architecture, you get to a point where you don't actively think, “I will design this building by employing the principles of hierarchy and unity. Those are my two principles for this building.” Things like hierarchy and unity are more like subconscious tools [rather than rules]. It’s a skill set that naturally occurs when you're designing… when you produce a drawing you can critique from these lenses almost subconsciously and you don't think about the principles. You just feel it and if something doesn't feel right about the design, and you could trace that feeling back to one of these principles.” (02:43)
(05:23) Formulas for beauty in architecture.
“Previously, there were prescribed rules you should follow. You could design the building by following a route. If you follow and adhere to these steps or rules, the design is therefore beautiful, like following an equation. However, in contemporary architecture, there is distinction between rules versus principles and toolsets. Ideas like proportion, scale, hierarchy, balance, order, unity, and symmetry, are tools. They are not rules to follow. No one's telling me that the column has to be x-height; it has to be this wide with a line here and here; if I have this color then I have to have that color; this material has to be paired with that material. There's none of that.” (09:41)
(13:09) Symmetry vs Beauty.
“Symmetry, the golden section, and the rule of thirds…. These are probably the three most common principles that are often talked about in architecture school, but very briefly. I feel like they're mostly talked about by people, who don't know how to design, as a way to shortcut the design process. Design is a tricky process in which there are a lot of unknowns and iterations. I think it's natural for people who don't know how to do that to want to find something they can latch on to to give them security. So they think, “If I employ the principle of symmetry, then maybe it will get me a third of the way to a beautiful design.” Some clients also think, “What about their rule of thirds? What about the golden section? The Fibonacci curved? Can we do those? Will that make it beautiful?” Honestly, I think it's just an attempt for people to try to deconstruct and make sense of something they might not understand.” (14:09)
(19:05) Can beauty be taught?
“With students and clients, sometimes their notions of beauty are too strongly tied to their personal preferences which are based on things they've seen and liked which becomes categorized in their brain as beautiful vs ugly. They then use those references as a way to judge other things. I'm not saying it's wrong, but it's a very limited way to create and understand architecture. People who have more exposure to the arts have a heightened sense of what makes a design feel beautiful and works even if it's not their cup of tea. That's a more productive and interesting conversation. The idea of liking something versus it being beautiful are completely separate things.” (22:17)
(27:17) Style vs Beauty.
(29:36) Music and Architecture.
(40:34) Lighting and beauty in architecture.
(49:03) Materials and textures for beauty.
(51:35) Project context and beauty.
“Something else that makes architecture beautiful is the context. How many of those architecture projects being published are beautiful because it’s the context that’s beautiful versus the building itself that’s beautiful? I'm not saying that the projects are not beautiful, a lot of them are, but many are just okay. They're just made beautiful because there is an amazing natural open landscape in the background. It's a little bit of a trick, which also indicates that you could have a context that might not look like much, but still produce a beautiful building because of the way they intersect and interact.” (51:36)
“Cultural context is very important because different cultures have different standards for what is considered aesthetically pleasing. Cultural differences also explain the function of a building and what people feel comfortable with. People live very differently in different places. What we perceive and think of as a house in Western countries is different from Eastern countries. What's fascinating is that, probably because of the internet, there's been a flattening of aesthetics across the world in terms of contemporary and modern architecture. So, you'll see similar palettes and styles being employed from one place to the next, or a similar kind of thinking, which can be productive, but it can also be very dangerous.” (55:36)
(58:01) Movement and beauty.
(01:03:10) What makes a building beautiful?
(01:08:08) Favorite beautiful building.
HAVE QUESTIONS OR SUGGESTIONS?
TEXT/CALL OUR HOTLINE
213-222-6950
#421 - GUIDE TO ARCHITECTURE FEES
SUMMARY
This week David and Marina of FAME Architecture & Design discuss the different types of architecture fee structures including the percentage of construction cost model; the fixed fee model; the hourly fee structure; and hybrid fee structures. The two also cover the benefits and challenges of each fee structure; interior design fees; why architect’s fees vary greatly; the amount of work involved in each project phase; and more. Enjoy!
TIMESTAMPS
(00:00) Types of Fee Structures.
(00:44) Percentage of construction cost.
(14:29) Fixed fee model.
“When comparing architects’ fees, most of the time, the reason why a fee will be significantly higher or lower than another is that there is a quantifiable difference in the fees and services they offer and the quality of those services. It's not because someone's just cheaper to be cheaper, more expensive to be more expensive, or not necessarily that someone's way more talented than another person. It has to do with the quantifiable difference in their services.
For any client looking to hire an architect, you must know the services they're providing and the quality of those services. You have to, have to, have to know it because this project could cost millions of dollars. It's going to take years. It's a huge commitment. You want to spend a couple of weeks doing that little bit of research to find out what services they're offering and the quality of the services. ” (16:01)
(18:24) Be aware of fixed fee model inclusions and exclusions.
(27:39) Benefits of fixed fee model.
(31:35) Challenges of fixed fee model.
“If you know as a client that you have a hard time in life making choices, it’s most likely that you're going to have a hard time making choices on a project. So, if you're limited to one option for the design of each project element, that's probably not going to work out for you. It's hard for the architect to [provide multiple design options] when they are an additional service and ask for extra payment. It kills the buzz of the agreed fixed fee at the beginning because now the project is going beyond the agreed number.” (32:57)
(36:41) Hourly fee structure.
“When you have an architect who charges hourly, they should give you a ballpark idea of how much the total fee should be. That goes back to using the percentage of construction cost structure to establish that benchmark. So even if you go with an hourly fee, your architect probably has an idea of the range it's going to be. As you move along, they should keep you updated on where you are with the fee that’s spent so far compared to what was estimated and how much work is left.” (40:17)
“The hourly fee structure is not as suitable for clients who don't trust the people they're working with, or if they want to manage the hours of a creative. Design is not always efficient. It could be efficient to draw and model, but to get to the design… it's not an efficient process. That's just the nature of what creation is.” (45:05)
(48:15) Hybrid fee structure.
(55:29) Interior Design fees.
(01:00:03) Why architect's fees vary greatly.
(01:01:54) How much work takes place in each phase.
(01:03:49) Summary.
“You always want to hire the professional that's the best fit for you, and the one who's qualified more than anything else. So, if you're talking to an architect and they have a different fee structure than the other one, but you don’t like their fee structure, then tell them or just deal with it. Always go with the architect who you like as a person and who you trust. That's the most important thing, always. That trumps everything else, including the fee amount to a degree… It's a mistake for clients to compare two architects and say, “Well, there's a 2% difference in fees. I like the more expensive one better [But I’ll go with the cheaper one.” Go with the one that's 2% more. You don't want to roll that dice on a project that is going to be this close of a relationship for years.” (01:04:33)
HAVE QUESTIONS OR SUGGESTIONS?
TEXT/CALL OUR HOTLINE
213-222-6950
#417 - DESIGN ARCHITECT & EXECUTIVE ARCHITECT ROLES EXPLAINED
SUMMARY
This week David and Marina of FAME Architecture & Design discuss the responsibilities and roles of the Design Architect and the Architect of Record (AOR) also known as the Executive Architect when working together during each project phase from pre-design to concept design; schematic design; design development; construction documentation; bidding; and construction. They also discuss legal liabilities; fee differences; knowledge overlap; and more. Enjoy!
TIMESTAMPS
(00:00) Design Architect vs Executive Architect.
“The responsibilities of the design and executive architect are very different. The Design Architect sets the big design vision for the project. The Executive Architect, also known as the Architect of Record, is responsible for turning that vision into reality by managing construction documents, construction administration, and permitting. When you have these two entities working together, all design decisions and design oversight happen by the design architect, and the architect of record is there to help them execute their vision. [At the start of a project, it's very important to establish the role of these two architects to avoid them talking over each other.]” (03:54)
(06:42) Pre-Design Phase.
(09:38) Concept Design Phase.
(13:25) Schematic Design Phase.
(17:04) Design Development.
(24:14) Construction Documents.
“[After the design phases] clients and Executive Architects could think, “Let’s change this design detail here to make it work for construction. It’s not a big deal.” But if that repeats a thousand times across the whole project, it will become an issue. Clients should understand the value of the services from each professional. If you hire a design architect for their design vision, then it makes sense to have the design architecture involved during Construction Documents. [Oftentimes, during Construction Documents, the design architect is like consultant that ensures the project is progressing towards the right direction.]” (28:39)
(30:34) Bidding and Construction Phase.
“The person who did the construction documents should always be the one performing construction administration. [When the executive architect goes on site they have the drawing in their head of that exact thing, and they understand how it’s meant to look.] Construction administration is also the phase where contractors will have questions. So the executive architect will report back to the design architect if any of the construction issues have a big impact on the project’s design.” (32:20)
(33:21) Legal liabilities of design and executive architects.
(36:17) Fees for Design vs Executive Architect.
“The Architect of Record is doing all the construction administration, all the construction documentation, half of the design development, and maybe more depending on the situation, which means the Executive Architect is doing around 55-75% of the work. Clients have asked me, “Why is the Executive Architect’s fee and billable hours higher than the Design Architect's? The Design Architect has designed the whole project. The only thing the Executive Architect has to do is the permit drawings and visit the site now and then. And the contractors are doing the heavy lifting during construction.” This question is based on false information. That's not how buildings happen. There is sometimes the misconception that the Design Architect has designed the whole project so there’s not much left to do. When in reality, the bulk of the architecture work happens after the design phases.” (38:59)
(45:12) Keys for successful teamwork.
“When you hire a Design Architect and an Executive Architect, you want to make sure that both parties get along and understand what they're hired for. Some offices only work as the Architect of Record (AOR), and that's their business model. They just want to accomplish what's been designed and those people tend to be great because they're extremely focused and they don't have ego. They're just interested in the technical side of the project. Some offices do both design and AOR. It’s important to establish clear responsibilities among all the parties in this case so there is no confusion or frustration from one side to the other, especially when there are gaps during the process or design.” (45:22)
“A key takeaway for clients when hiring architects is that if a Design Architect only produces the design but has no interest in being involved during construction documentation, it's a major red flag. Ideally, you want to hire two offices that overlap in knowledge but also understand that their responsibilities do not overlap. [As a client, you should hire a design architect who understands the basics of construction technicalities and how to navigate around the different building codes because those should be considered during design.]” (54:05)
(01:05:53) Summary.