+22

What was the brief?

A self-initiated, architect-led design-develop-build project, Tesseract house was not designed with a specific client in mind. Rather, it was conceived as a business case to prove that one can create great contemporary architecture that fulfills a demand in the marketplace, while demonstrating that unbridled creativity generates innovative and artful spaces, using conventional and readily available construction methods. All of this was accomplished without breaking the bank and with a typical budget for a house of this kind

From the Architect:

“Good architecture can be created without adding massively to the scale or budget”
“Even contemporary design can be contextual and local.”

How is the Tesseract House unique?

The project has no programmatic limitations, enabling the design team to experiment with, and implement ideas that would not typically be seen in more conventional homes. The responses to the site constraints informed the big design ideas in order to allow the house to function well as a dwelling as well as be of the highest comfort standards, in relation to having access to natural light and fresh air. This intent was carried all the way down to the detailing of the house where the various textures and materials are elegantly and thoughtfully joined together.

The more poetic aspects of the projects were explored and expressed in the showcase video that was produced to tell the story of the house (see video in this bowerkit).

What were the key challenges?

1. Antiquated zoning rules
2. Execution/Build using conventional methods
3. Deep Site/Long House

What were the solutions?

1. The design team worked hard at finding the right balance between a design that would have been approved as of right and a design that required variances in order to achieve the desired result. Where variances were unavoidable, clearly defensible positions helped argued the case with city authorities in order to smoothly navigate the approvals process.
2. Being conscious of the difference between the “correct way of doing things” and the “way things are done”, in order to keep the design intent alive and maintain the level of detail quality. the design team was aiming for, they had to develop a close dialog with the construction team, combining their experiences in service of a higher quality build. The design-develop-build model helped removing middlemen and roadblocks in order to achieve this level of quality.
3. The narrow and long site made it challenging to come up with a layout that would allow for air and light to penetrate the deepest parts of the house. Cleverly placed and shaped light wells and well placed openings solved this issue.

What building methods were used?

The house was designed using traditional stick-built construction methods as a way to allow the design team to focus on the spatial and material qualities of the house, while making it easier for the construction team to erect the house using methods they were familiar with.

Photo: Ryan Fung
Architect: Phaedrus Studio
Media: rvltr

The post Tesseract House – Self-Initiated Contemporary Architecture Conceived as a Business Case appeared first on Archipreneur.

This week’s interview is with Asaf Gottesman.

Asaf didn’t start his career in architecture right away. He did a detour studying liberal arts, worked amongst other things as antiques dealer and property developer. But when he finally decided to study architecture, he founded his first architectural practice in 1992 right after graduation always concentrating on architecture led development.

With A. Gottesman Architecture he was both successful and working to capacity, but was still not earning a living. So he decided to design on to larger scale and go beyond designing villas. Together with Ami Szmelcman he founded GSARCH and moved to Paris.

Asaf is now looking back on a 25 year career and found himself again at a crossroad. He passed on to Ami Szmelcman the responsibility of leading GSARCH and created a new company under the name of Gottesman Architecture – fully dedicated to entrepreneurship.

Keep reading to learn about Asaf’s career steps and that it is never to late to change the path of own career.

Enjoy the interview!

You founded your first practice right after university. Looking back, was this a good decision?

I think so. Unlike most architects, it took me awhile to enter the profession. Prior to studying architecture I was a soldier, studied French Civilization at the Sorbonne, I earned an honors degree in History of Art and Comparative Literature from Columbia University, I spent a year in Florence writing a book (unpublished or un-publishable), I was an antiques dealer, a commodity trader and a property developer.

In preparation for my studies at the AA, I worked on a building site for almost a year; moving from one trade to the next, until I finally learnt to appreciate a good glass of whiskey. During my studies at the AA in London I undertook in parallel several property developments, which, apart from their financial benefits, was a great way to accumulate experience.

At graduation I was 33 years old, a father of two with a third on the way. I simply did not have the time to spend a few years in someone else’s office and I felt that my accumulated experiences would enable me to overcome whatever challenges lay ahead.

Could you tell us about your first project, the restoration of the famed Richard Kauffman Bauhaus building in Tel Aviv over 25 years ago, and how it determined your career? 

Hess 21 was a family project. My parents bought the building for themselves and entrusted me with the job of designing and managing the project. Many architects begin their careers working for a family member but I felt that in this case my parents’ generosity and trust was extraordinary.

When we bought this wonderful urban villa it was in a terrible state; it was divided into six apartments and offices, the garden had been converted in to a parking lot, there were discarded needles of junkies in the back and the building was falling apart. The climate in Tel-Aviv is extremely corrosive, especially close to the sea and in order to renovate this building it was necessary to strip it to the core.

The notion of building conservation was a new thing in Israel. Coming from England, where building conservation at the beginning of the 90’s had descended into dogma and the debate about architecture was generally reduced to a discourse about “styles,” it was a pleasure to enter into a dialogue with Richard Kauffman; to study the building and its original plans and to formulate a view that responded, not only to the integrity of the past, but also took into consideration present day culture. There is something debilitating about full-blown conservation. In the quest to preserving the remnants of a culture that arguably no longer exists, we often sacrifice the culturing of contemporary culture. For me conservation, or indeed architecture, is about sensitivity; about reading the forces at play and formulating an approach that enriches our reality. One must respect the past, consider the forces of nature, take account of all aspects of our surroundings (both urban or rural), but ultimately our role is to transform reality and enrich it.

Working on Hess was a remarkable experience because Richard Kauffman was an exceptional architect who bridged 19^thcentury culture and the early days of modernism. When he chose to diverge from tradition he understood the consequences and although he was a great architect at every scale, he had a sense of space that was extraordinary. He created quiet spaces; well proportioned, with just the right amount of light.

What made you decide to found Gottesman–Szmelcman Architecture? Was there a particular moment that sealed the decision for you?

Prior to the creation of Gottesman Szmelcman Architecture I opened my own practice in 1992 under the name A. Gottesman Architecture. After completing my parent’s home I wanted to concentrate on architecture led development. I partnered with some developers and in parallel built my own home in a village north of Tel-Aviv. It is a simple fair-faced concrete and glass building but when it was completed the reaction was surprising.

Suddenly, clients who wished to escape the prevailing style of Tuscan Villas, were approaching me and before I knew it I had a practice with 15 architects and up to 20 villas on the books. What was remarkable about my clients was their curiosity. Private homes are the stuff of dreams and I always felt that in their specificity they are a form of portraiture. Each home became a reflection of the client(s); its materiality, texture, scale and composition reflected for me a dialogue between what was necessary and what, nevertheless, needs to be expressed. In eight years I basically completed 10 villas, all of them substantially different and challenging.

In the process I had become a kind of brand. I was charging the highest architectural fees in the country but I was still not earning a living. In several cases I lost money and in the rest I basically broke even. It took me on average 6,000 hours to complete a project with all the unique detailing. There was no way I could recoup the costs. I realized that in order to advance I needed to design on a larger scale and go beyond designing villas. With three years of work on my books, we moved to Paris in order to expand my practice into Europe. It was then that I met Ami Szmelcman who came for an interview. Rather than offering him a position in the new Paris office I suggested we create the Paris office together and that is how Gottesman-Szmelcman Architecture was created.

Your practice goes beyond the conventional architectural package. Could you elaborate on this statement maybe with the example of the recently completed Arsuf Residences?

Architecture for me is an all-encompassing discipline. It is about responsibility and creating values; social, cultural and yes monetary. I am committed to addressing all aspects of the project. It is not only about design but also the consequences of the design. In order to take responsibility, one needs to understand the big picture including the political and financial aspects of the project. This extends to marketing strategy, financing, tendering, fund raising, and negotiating with banks or donors.

Architecture for me is an all-encompassing discipline. It is about responsibility and creating values; social, cultural and yes monetary.

Regarding Arsuf; I won the project in an invited competition in 1995 or 6. It is hard to summarize in a few lines a project that took 20 years to complete. The project required the altering of an urban plan for a hotel into a residential complex comprised of 10 unites; each approximately 360m². This was a challenging project in every respect; urban planning, working on a coastal cliff, managing the topography and the unstable terrain but the ultimate challenge and success of the project is due to the clients. Over a period of 20 years the clients never lost faith, remained civil and friendly both towards each other and towards me. In spite of each apartment being different, everyone got along and focused upon their own good fortune rather what their neighbors got.

At a critical moment I totally transformed the project but they all had the good sense to realize that the new scheme was substantially better. The long realization process was due to the challenges of gaining the building permit and once that was achieved it took slightly more than 2 years to complete construction. The clients never waivered and rarely compromised even when some suffered financial pressures.

Your company has now been in operation for more than 10 years. Looking back, what was the best decision you made for your practice?

There were several critical decisions that I feel need to be mentioned. The first was making Ami a partner. He is a wonderful architect and an extraordinary person.

Our move to Paris was also critical to our evolution as was the decision to not create a one-stop shop. Rather than undertaking the entire design process within our practice, we focused upon creating relationships with local practices. We became “concept architects” yet remained engaged throughout the realization process. Each region has its own set of challenges and cultural/technical characteristics. We found it invaluable to have the local perspective, to establish a dialogue with fellow architects who have the ability to reveal to us the underlying forces and challenges that need to be addressed.

My involvement as both an architect and developer has substantially expanded my understanding of the potential of architecture.

Finally what was a game changer for me was enlarging my activities so that they included real estate development. Since 2005 I have worked as both an architect that offers a service and as a property developer. My involvement as both an architect and developer has substantially expanded my understanding of the potential of architecture. It has enabling me to address ever increasing complexities and to benefit financially from my own creativity.

What are you working on right now?

I will be 60 years old this year and I am at a crossroads. It has become increasingly clear to me that what I wish to focus upon is architecture led development and not the service sector, As a result, I have passed on to Ami Szmelcman the responsibility of leading GSARCH and I have created a new company under the name of Gottesman Architecture which will be fully dedicated to entrepreneurship. We will continue to cooperate at the architectural level but while Ami will expand GSARCH’s service footprint, I will concentrate upon real estate development.

Do you have any advice for archipreneurs who are interested in starting their own business?

In 2013 I published an e-book under the title “The Architectural Condition.” It is an analysis of the architectural profession, its inherent flaws and potential. Although it was written in the midst of the global financial crisis, I believe that it is still relevant today. I recommend it both for practicing architects and those who feel that they are not maximizing their potential.

How do you see the future of the architectural profession? In which areas (outside of traditional practice) can you see major opportunities for up and coming developers and architects?

Architecture, as a traditional service industry, is in trouble in my opinion. It is badly structured, poorly remunerated and, in most cases, flawed in the scope and depth of the service. I think the profession needs to undergo some profound changes in order to remain viable to more than the top 1%. I believe that architectural studies are a real gift but they stop short at a critical point.

I think the profession needs to undergo some profound changes in order to remain viable to more than the top 1%.

In order for architects to be able to deliver a better product or service they need to specialize. The all-encompassing architect who can design anything and avoids specialization yet avoids overall responsibility is reducing the effectiveness of the profession. Once we embrace specialization we can encourage research (which is basically non-existent in architecture) and begin to expand into adjacent fields such as virtual reality, entrepreneurship, and even Art. Actually it is this need to splinter the profession in to specialized domains that is the principle conclusion of my book.

About Asaf Gottesman

Asaf Gottesman was born in Israel in 1958 but lived the majority of his youth in London. In 1977 he enlisted in the IDF where he served in the Paratroopers. After his military service Asaf moved to Paris to study at the Sorbonne before continuing to the USA where he earned an honors degree in History of Art and Comparative Literature from Columbia University. After working in commodity trading for a couple of years, Asaf enrolled at the Architectural Association and in 1992 received his Architectural Association Diploma & RIBA II.

That same year Asaf established his own architectural practice in Israel where it quickly became a leader in the domain of private homes. In 1999, the practice expanded its activities into the research of the virtual domain. The research lead to an important US patent that introduced innovative user interfaces and 3D information environments that were the precursors of such products as Apple’s Coverflow, Microsoft’s Vista 3D environments, as well as, various other 3D display & search environments.

In 2003 Asaf co-founded Gottesman Szmelcman Architecture with Ami Szmelcman. The partnership has won several international competitions and awards. It has projects in Israel, throughout Europe and has recently begun working in the USA. 90 Morton is the first NYC project designed by Gottesman Szmelcman Architecture.

Visit Gottesman Architecture for more info.

Asaf is the author of “The Architectural Condition;” an e-book that analyses the world of the architect and speculates upon how to address the many shortfalls of the profession.

As of 2005, Asaf Gottesman has worked as both an architect and a property developer, undertaking projects in Poland, France & the US and as of the end of 2017, is fully focused upon creating Architecture led developments.

Asaf is married to Miriam for over 30 years and they have three children; Adam, Danielle and Dafna.

The post How To Create Value Through Architecture Led Development With Asaf Gottesman appeared first on Archipreneur.

Roger Zogolovitch, Founder of Solidspace, is a practicing architect and independent developer with 40 years of experience in the field that he told us about in a recent interview. He has built an impressive portfolio of urban housing projects on gap sites in London – such as the Zog House, but also more experimental architectural design projects.

The Houseboat, an award-winning single house with a more organic form than other Solidspace rectilinear projects, is one of them. It is not a gap site project, but located on a beautiful site overlooking Poole Harbour on the south coast of England. It was designed in collaboration with Meredith Bowles of Mole Architects and the project was managed by Rebecca Granger Architects.

The house has been conceived as two upturned hulls propping themselves together facing the sea, and has been built with an in-situ concrete base and a Douglas Fir timber frame constructed shell. The plan is butterfly in shape. The building emerges with floor plates fanning out from this concrete structure. Accommodation is split between the two wings connected with steps and landings bridging the voids.

The arrangement of the split-level is designed using the Solidspace DNA which works on half levels and leads the eye from a first to second space and finally a third. The lower ground level accommodates the sleeping quarters which are acoustically separated from the rest of the open plan volume.

The upper ground floor provides a kitchen and dining room with terrace overlooking the sea, rising a few steps to the sitting room and concluding the eyrie at the top level.

The Eat/Live/Work sectional arrangement is maintained making a single volume under the protection of the upturned hulls, giving spatial clarity to form and the experience.

The Houseboat is the winner of a South West RIBA Award 2017 and has been shortlisted for World Architecture Festival Awards 2017 House/Future category.

As most of the houses build for Solidspace, this house was promoted and sold by Inhabit Homes, the company founded by Roger’s son Gus Zogolovitch that evolved from Solidspace.

photos: Rory Gardiner

Location:

Poole, Dorset, UK

Project Data:

• Architect: Meredith Bowles of Mole Architects
• Developer: Solidspace
• Planning/Construction:  – 2016
• Residential units: 1
• Storeys: 4
• Net saleable/rentable area: 255.5 sqm (2750 SF)

The post The Houseboat – an Experimental Architectural Design Project Developed by Solidspace appeared first on Archipreneur.

DDG is a fully integrated real estate investment and development company located in NYC and San Francisco with employees from diverse professional backgrounds. DDG combines capital, design, development, construction and asset management.

A core advantages of DDG is the company’s knowledge and experience in all phases of the development and construction processes from acquisition through completion. For the residential condominium building 12 Warren in TriBeCa, NYC, DDG served as developer, architect, builder, and property manager.

The building features a plethora of handcrafted and artisanal details, none more striking than the signature façade of rough-hewn bluestone quarried in upstate New York. The hand-laid façade is already an impressive addition to one of Manhattan’s most desired residential neighborhoods, creating an engaging contrast when seen among TriBeCa’s historic loft buildings and modern glass structures.

Each of the 13 expansive residences, ranging from 2 to 4 bedrooms and 1,700 square feet to 3,800 square feet, boast ceilings detailed with architectural board-formed concrete finished at heights from 10 feet in the full-floor residences up to 22 feet in the triplex townhouse residences. Windows are 7 feet tall, allowing for an abundance of natural light to fill each home. Custom features and details fill the residences, including bluestone accents that connect the interiors back to the building’s architecture. Many residences also feature direct elevator entry and private outdoor space.

A fairly avant-garde model apartment has been furnished by The Future Perfect, with lots of exclusive new pieces from Neri & Hu, the Shanghai-based architecture and design studio. Located on the 8^th floor, standout furniture pieces in the full-floor home include a massive timber top shaker dining table; Danish oiled walnut trunk low cabinet with black lacquer exterior; trio of brass- and copper-topped side tables; and Capo King Bed.

In the building’s lobby, a solid bluestone wall moved in place from the quarry is a centerpiece along with a custom Bec Brittain-designed chandelier. DDG has also commissioned award-winning fine art photographer Jacqueline Hassink to photograph the bluestone quarry where the building’s stone elements originated and permanently display these works throughout the lobby.

12 Warren has a one-of-a-kind private fitness center with reclaimed wood flooring, exposed brick masonry and board-formed concrete details. Additional amenities will include a 24-hour attended lobby, landscaped roof terrace, and DDG’s signature concierge service. Storage rooms and bicycle storage will also be available.

Location:

Tribeca, New York City, NY, USA

Project Data:

• Architect/Developer/Builder: DDG
• Residential units: 13
• Storeys: 13

Read more Architect-Developer posts here.

The post Expressive Stone Façade: Luxury Apartments in Manhattan by DDG appeared first on Archipreneur.

This week’s interview is with Declan Keefe, Strategic Director of Placetailor in Boston.

Placetailor developed from a design/build company to a company that offers design, development and construction – or, as Declan calls it, a plug and play business model.

Declan has a lot of experience in finding land, getting projects off the ground and placemaking and is  happy to share his expertise step by step with you! His marketing strategies go beyond websites and business cards and could be rather called a philosophy than a strategy.

Keep on reading to get inspired by an architect who believes in sustainability, collaboration and the power of community.

Enjoy the interview!

Could you tell us about Placetailor and about your role in the company?

I’ve been working in the company from the beginning. I took it over a couple of years into the business. I’m not the initial founder; I am the Strategic Director.

Placetailor in its current form is an architecture, construction and real estate development company. And my role specifically is to link those three arms of the business. I make sure architecture speaks to construction and construction speaks to development and all the other permeations of that as well.

Further I am setting the course for the company as it relates to our mission and our business model. What are things we care about, what are things that we have to have in a project for it to be deemed quality Placetailor project.

What is Placetailor’s business model?

When Placetailor was first started, we were what is more commonly known as design-build company. The model came from the thinking that the architecture and the construction professions these days are always at odds with one another. And we think that it’s quite a detriment to the profession.

The origin of both professions came from the master builder. So we created Placetailor with the question in mind “How can we recreate today – when we’re pushing more and more towards specialization – a business that can still do specialized work but also is able to be the architect and the builder?”

Originally we were looking for people who work as a carpenter and a designer. Today we still have some people who work on both sides of the business but there are also some people, who just work in construction or just on design.

A few years into the business we made a major transitions: to become a developer as well. And we felt like it fit very much in the conversation related to master builder because typically that was the way it worked. The master builder would work directly with the equivalent of a developer. The term didn’t exist back then, but it was someone building a cathedral or his or her mansion.

So we thought, internally, we could have that model expanded so that the development entity itself, which technically is a separate business, hires the architecture company, which is really ourselves, to do the design work and then hires the construction company, which is really ourselves again, to do the project as we’ve envisioned it on the development side. To the outside world, they look like one business: Placetailor that does architecture, construction, and development. On the inside, it’s a little more complicated because things are broken up for legal reasons, security and insurance.

Today about 75% of our work comes from our own development.

This model allows for our business to operate as what I call plug and play. We can be just the architect, the builder or the developer, or in a sort of the ideal visualization of the business model, we’re all of them.

How do you find land?

There are two paths:

The first is really a very simple one and maybe it’s hard to imagine until you do this. But it’s literally just driving around and looking for land.

The hunt looks different every time. It could be we see a piece of land and call the owner and they say, “Sure. We’ll sell it.” It could be easy as that. It could be years and years of, ”Well, sure, we’ll sell it, but we have all these tax issues.” And we’ve got to help work out the entire back end for them.

The other way, which I think is maybe even more of a fruitful path to take because it’s not just helpful for finding land but it’s helpful for really operating a business in general, is getting out and meeting people and being willing to collaborate and being willing to have a sort of open-ended conversations about something that could happen in the future. It’s the long-term approach.

When you collaborate you’re working with clients again. It’s not just a speculative real estate development. You bring them into your team. And they can help finance the project. So they’re both client and collaborator.

For architects who know very little about real estate development, how would you break down the process of getting the first project off the ground?

I think there’s something before the land hunt, which is really determining what it is you’re trying to get out of the project. Why do you want to be a developer and not just an architect? What type of development are you trying to do? Is it a residential development? Are you trying to do commercial?

And then looking at the markets that are near you as what could it bear. Analyzing a market means being in the area, being in the neighborhood, spending time at a coffee shop next door to the place you want to build or develop something, and learn what the people are saying that are there and what they feel, and how you could fit into that story.

A piece of land is a useful starting point because it’s going to be a fixed number. You know this land is on the market at certain price, and you know that you want to put an offer in that’s 10% higher than that. And because that’s how you think given what you’ve found from your research that the market will bear and you may actually get your offer accepted.

Then there’s the obvious question of where does that money comes from, right? There are many different answers. One example I mentioned already which is you could have already built up relationships, found people to collaborate with. For example you’re looking at a piece of land that three specific families want to live in. Now you pitch it to them first. You say, “Would you want to live here? We think we can fit a house that’s this big.”

Some of the initial architecture work is doing your zoning analysis, looking at your code analysis, what could actually fit on this potential lot. And then pitching it to the people, who want to live there or to some investors. You have to have a network of people who might be interested in supporting you as an individual at that point.

And there are those people out there who have a strong enough vision that they’re willing to support you. And sometimes they’re willing to support you because they know that they’re probably going to get a deal, if it’s your first project. Just to be honest about it is that you’re going to have to give and take a bit on your first one to make something happen.

But now you imagine you have that money, you put your offer in and the offer is either accepted or denied. If it’s accepted, then the next stage is the purchase and sale agreement, which is where all the contingencies of the deal really get ironed out. So that’s going to be in communication usually between realtors. It could be a direct communication though often the realtors are the go-between. And then it’s usually realtors who are then talking to lawyers. And the lawyers are really the ones hashing it out. And then it filters back through to the realtors and then out to the buyer and seller.

We often operate without realtors because we like to be more directly connected to the process. And so in addition to architecture, construction and development, usually, we’re also doing our own sales for the scale that we’re at currently.

So then let’s assume that our purchase and sale gets approved. Now likely that means you’re putting in some additional money. So the offer had a small amount. The purchase and sale would mean you’re putting a deposit in. So, you’re going to put in some small percentage, by 15% of the total sale. At which point you’re scheduling for your closing that and which when you’d actually own the land.

And it would be at that point where the attorneys would do a final sweep of, “Is the lot salable?” And if it is and there’s not really that much more negotiation that happens between the purchase and sell in the closing. At the closing itself, it’s a whole series of paperwork and you have to get your insurance lined up, and all of those. There’s a lot of sort of back end to it there.

If you’re getting financing through a bank, it becomes a little more difficult for a first developer to prove that they should take that risk, but it’s feasible with the right bank and the right project. If you’re working with partners, such as homeowners who want to live there, they’re getting their finances together maybe through their banks or maybe just through capital that they have and putting it in place. You’re probably forming an LLC with the entities who will own it in the end. And even we do that. We have an LLC per project. So we start a new company every time.

And then let’s say that the closing is done and we now own the piece of land, at which point we go beyond that initial massing or zoning study to figure out what could go there. And for us, we just start the architecture. If you’re just a developer, you’re hiring an architect. And you do the design, you submit, l and if all goes well, you get your approvals.

Then we submit again for building permit. And then we have building permit, we build it because ideally, we will have already gotten approval for our financing from the beginning. You’ll have to finish that paperwork to get the second round of release for the construction lending. And then once you build the whole project, you’ll get construction lending throughout.

And then when it’s built, depending on the type of project you’re working on, either you sell it or you could rent it if that is your chosen development method.

And those processes look different whether it’s commercial or residential or whether it’s what we call condos here or co-op housing, or you know whatever the processes. It looks slightly different to sales. And then hopefully, at the end, you have some money left and that would be the profit of the project.

What marketing strategies have been most effective to find new clients, promote services or sell your products?

I think the thinking about marketing and the definition of it should be expanded beyond your web presence or your business card to whatever it is that people are left with after they’ve come in contact with your business in any way. So that contact could be through social media, through giving lectures at a local conference or through students at the school that I teach at. Or it could be me running into them in the coffee shop. And I think being really cognizant that all of this relates to marketing is very important.

And for us, we have a few things, which we think of as differentiators. And a differentiator works for us in our marketing, in our branding. And it works for us fairly well in the sales of our actual units because the project themselves become differentiated by the fact that we have these differentiators in our business.

So one is our business model, that we’re the architect, developer and contractor. That’s great for clients because they feel like they can trust one entity. They don’t have to worry about bringing in somebody else.

Another one is that transition we made, around the same time we started doing development: we became an employee on cooperative.

It’s a strong social mission of ours, that anyone that works within our company has the potential to become an owner, if they stay with the company for three years or more.

And so it gives a longer-term commitment to the business. And the cooperative model that we use is equal profit share, equal vote.

And so depending on who I’m talking to, this fact is useful to show we have the skill set internally for design, for architecture, development and construction. We care about our people.

The third differentiator that we have is related specifically to the way in which we do design and construction. And this one was really able to launch the business early on. And so we work exclusively on high performance, energy efficient and sustainable architecture. So we won’t take projects that aren’t that way. It is who we are. We believe that is the baseline and we need to be raising the bar even higher.

And then I believe that you need to have a basis of a solid branding as it’s typically thought of where they’re going to go to your website and it needs to feel the same way that your conversation just felt. And you need to hand them business card that feels the same way that you’re conversation just felt like because if you’re mixing your messages, they’re not going to believe that’s true.

Everybody is talking about placemaking these days. What’s your strategy on this?

I think it is all about being engaged with all the stakeholders and not just the client. And for us, we have a business model that allows us to do that a little more collaboratively even because we have the architect, the builder and developer in the room. So we can quickly do a lot of those conversations upfront.

But even if that’s not your business model, I think there needs to be a considered effort to get the builder and the developer in the room and have those conversations. And maybe they could all come to the community meeting so that they can all get it. So I think that’s the basis of what placemaking should be about.

In addition in our company we do the design very collaboratively. I fear the idea of a solo architect as developer who can get too caught up in their ego as an architect. Who then wants to design their masterpiece and try to put all of the things that they imagine they ever wanted to do in one project. I have seen this happening before.

And that actually doesn’t make good architecture in the sense of good placemaking. It makes good pieces of architecture that operate on their own. And it’s probably too expensive and you probably won’t make money on the development.

Whereas, if you are thinking about the design collaboratively, it’s not just one person’s vision that appeals to just that one person. And I think it’s fine if you’re building your own house. If the development is anything but your own house, I would urge you to get out of your own head and into the community and with other people.

I think that’s the process of placemaking: connection to the community and a collaboration internally.

Do you have any advice for archipreneurs who are interested in starting their own business?

My biggest advice is: Have the right reason for doing this. Truthfully, it’s a lot of administrative work. The reality behind the romanticism of architect as developer is you do less of the fun stuff and more of the not fun stuff. But you do get a little bit more freedom.
And potentially, if you do it well, you can make more money. But if you do it just okay, you’ll loose a lot of money and time, and you could disrupt your whole career. So my advice is: Do not take it lightly.

The second piece of that advice is to not just know why you’re doing development, but know what you’re trying to achieve as a person in this world. What is the impact you want to make? We as a firm are looking at our total impact, our carbon footprint as a business, the carbon footprint of each building, the social footprints of the buildings. How is a building affecting the place? How are we affecting the people who we get to work with? And we want all of those impacts to be positive.

Because if we’re too caught up in the fact that we are making it just for the sake of making a building, we’re not looking at the potential positive impact we can have on the world. We’re setting in stone something for hundreds of years potentially that isn’t what we really want to represent as people.

The connection between architect and developer gives us the control to start making those decisions unlike you have in most other scenarios. If you’re just the architect, you can make some of those decisions. But the clients make most of those decisions. They won’t let you do energy efficiency. They won’t let you do those community meetings.

But when you start to have control, it really means you need to have your moral code in the right place so that you yourself make the decisions that are right for the future generations.

How do you see the future of the architectural profession? In which areas (outside of traditional practice) can you see major opportunities for up and coming developers and architects?

One of the things that will change how the industry works is the automatization of things in robotics. And I think that it is going to have a much greater impact on the architecture profession than it feels like to me. And I say that because the modular and prefab buildings have been of interest for a long time, but they’ve not been out major in market share. And it’s partly because the processes that have been for modularization of architecture have still actually been pretty inefficient.

And we’re getting to the place with automatization and robotics. But that’s not going to be the case for very much longer. And we’re going to have such automatization that the construction field is going to become a completely different thing.

And in some cases, I think the architectural profession will start to disappear, as we see it now, because it’s the case that most architecture work is done for just the top 1%. And this goes back to my advice about what is it you really want to be doing. If those are the people that you’re trying to support with your work, that’s total your prerogative.

If we’re trying to do design work for the rest of the world, then we will have to start thinking about different business models. One of them maybe to be working alongside this modularity and improvements in manufacturing such that the result of that is not just cheap, inefficient, uncomfortable houses, but quality, high-performance, healthy, light-filled, comfortable places for people to live. And that’s the work of architects.

And it would be too easy for us as we go down the path of automatization for that to go the wrong way. And so I think we shouldn’t leave that in the hands of just the roboticists and the engineers. Even though I’m sure that they’re wonderful people, they’re not thinking about what the architects are. So we need to be in those processes and thinking ahead.

About Declan Keefe

Declan is a founding member of Placetailor, and is a current owner as well.  As the strategic director, he keeps the company in order and oversees all of Placetailor’s projects.  If you are interested in Placetailor helping you with a project, Declan would be the guy to talk to.  Declan is LEED AP, a certified passive house consultant, and like everyone at Placetailor, he is a designer as well as a builder.

The post Placetailor – Combining Design, Development and Construction to Create Sustainable Housing appeared first on Archipreneur.