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in History of Art and Comparative Literature from Columbia University, I spent a year in Florence writing a book (unpublished or un-publishable), I was an antiques dealer, a commodity trader and a property developer.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.

Dear architects,

I am an independent design-led developer specialising in custom build. My vision is to help change the way that we build, buy and live in our homes in the UK. I wanted to write this open letter to architects to explain how for me, the way that developers and architects interact needs to change. The old rules have been re-written.

I get emails, beautiful brochures and meeting requests from a lot of architects and designers. I enjoy the overtures, but unfortunately, while I work with some brilliant architects and would love to work with more, the reality is there aren’t enough projects to go around.

Observation #1 – Don’t wait for the commission

At time of writing, we are actively working on 5 live projects. This is not unusual for a developer of our size. Our projects include doing the marketing and sales on three developments, and project managing two. We chose the architect in only one of those projects. So, even though we have plans to grow, it will still be only on the odd occasion that we have the opportunity to commission designers.

Observation #2 – Join the pitch

Development for me is bringing everything together, the design team, the money, the building team, the legals, the marketing and the sales down to the queries of the end purchasers.

We look to architects to create the vision for the project, but an architect will only produce a great building if the developer is on board.

In the movie industry, directors and producers find a good script and pitch to the studios together. This is how I think it should be in the building industry. I want to get together with an architect to work up an opportunity on land for sale to a point where I can secure the site and go out and raise money. This is not commission, this is collaboration.

Observation #3 – Spot the opportunity

If I see a piece of land for sale, I will have to choose which architect to work with and that will depend on a number of factors – their experience, size of the opportunity and the location of the site.

Some bits of land for sale already have planning, and some plots will be sold without planning. We have about 30-40 architects who we would like to work with and there are probably 1-3 projects in a year where we need architectural help. So, as they say stateside, ‘you do the math’.

However, architects who have come to us where they have spotted an opportunity, but need help in getting it off the ground, have ended up both with a site-finding fee and the design work. Site-finding is a skill and architects have the basic skills down pat. You are trained and experienced in planning, you can come up with creative solutions to gap sites and you like to cycle (which is by far the best way to spot off-market land)!

Observation #4 – Most developers don’t use architects

I have grown up with architecture in my blood, but not every developer has done so and most developments are ugly, bland and crass. Most, unsurprisingly, don’t use architects at all. I’ve heard that as few as 20% of new schemes have architects involved.

So, when you’re pitching to developers, you have to pick the ones that value architects. Don’t pitch to people who want the smallest possible flats and the flimsiest possible build quality – they don’t want you, and probably, you don’t want them either.

Instead, pick your developers carefully and they will buy into you and your design vision.

Observation #5 – Come prepared

The next time you request a meeting, don’t simply introduce your practice with a beautifully designed glossy brochure and past projects, come with an opportunity that you’ve spotted. It’s more fun, rewarding and more likely to lead to working together.

Developers will be impressed with your pro-activeness and I’ve never known a developer to turn down the chance to look at an interesting opportunity.

A word of warning, take care you don’t give away the land for sale to unscrupulous developers who will bid on the land from under you and then use your ideas.

I hope you found the above helpful and I would welcome your thoughts but most of all, I look forward to working with as many of you as possible.

Yours,

Gus Zogolovitch

***

Gus Zogolovitch is the Managing Director of Inhabit Homes.

He started his career in the City at Goldman Sachs where he was an equity analyst before he set up his first property specialising in residential projects. He ran this venture for a couple of years alone before he joined his architect father, Roger, and set up Solidspace with the aim to deliver design-led boutique new-build projects on forgotten inner city gap sites. He pioneered the Solidspace split-level model by building his own house in north west London where he still lives today. 

Gus has most recently started his own venture, Inhabit Homes, which acts as London’s first custom-build enabler, helping people build their own Grand Designs while also selling some of the most desirable new-builds in London. 

The post The New Rules for Architects and Developers: 5 Insights from an Industry Insider appeared first on Archipreneur.

This week’s interview is with London based developer Gus Zogolovitch, founder of several companies in property development and beyond.

Gus started on his entrepreneurial career path after discovering a gap in the market – project management for refurbishment projects – and building a business offering those services. He ran this venture for a couple of years before joining his architect father, Roger Zogolovitch, to set up Solidspace, which aims to deliver design-led boutique, new-build projects on forgotten inner-city gap sites. (Read the interview with Roger Zogolovitch here)

Gus then started his own venture, Inhabit Homes, London’s first custom-build enabler, which helps people to build their own homes and also sells some of the most desirable new-builds in London. During my interview with Gus, I learned that he had founded two additional companies and that they all interact in the process of building homes.

Continue reading to learn from a self-trained independent developer and to discover his take on the role of architecture today.

Enjoy the interview!

Could you tell us a little about your background? How did you start your career?

I was born and brought up in London, but I had travelled a lot both before and after I went to university. I also lived abroad during my studies.

I started my career in the City of London in investment banking, more by accident than by design. Basically, I had been living with a friend of mine who had to get up really early every day. He got really upset that I could sleep in every day so he got me a job in the City, so that I’d have to wake up early too!

I joined CS First Boston as an intern, working for a guy who later went to work at Goldman Sachs and took me with him. So in answer to your question how did I start my career, it was basically luck. At university, I studied mathematics and philosophy, so I had a good general knowledge but no specific knowledge.

And how did you get into property development?

I left Goldman Sachs and traveled around the world for two years. I did various things, even worked in Australia for a bit. When I came back to London I decided to try and get my house refurbished. I had a very bad experience trying to get builders. Since I didn’t have a job I decided to do it myself and take on the role of ‘project manager’.

It was a disaster! I employed some builders who then walked out on the job halfway through and so I then had to find some other builders who would finish what had been started.

But I realized that that was quite an interesting opportunity. I thought that maybe I could help other people who needed management for the refurbishment of their homes. The idea sounded much more appealing than a nine-to-five.

Seeing that gap in the market I set up my first company. My idea was, rather than paying a fixed price for a refurbishment job, why not pay the price of what it’s going to cost for each day of work and then pay a fee for my services in managing builders and making sure they’re doing what they should be doing. If it takes fewer days than scheduled, the client will save money. If it takes as much time as is scheduled, the client will not save money but can be assured the builders have turned up and completed the work.

I tried running that business for a couple of years. In the meantime, my father had been working on a residential development. I came in at the end to help him with some bits and pieces. And then he wanted me to help him with his website and stuff like that. So I did, and from then on I started doing more for his business. My refurbishment business started to decrease in size and so I ended up working full time for my father.

After a couple of years, we decided to become partners. We looked around, found some sites, bought them and developed them. One of these sites ended up being my house!

Did your experience from your work at Goldman Sachs help you to work with property development?

I suppose it gives you a head for numbers. That was very helpful because I think there are a lot of people in property development who can’t quite get their head around the numbers. They’ve probably been lucky because the markets did go up but they don’t always go up. For that reason, understanding the numbers and the finance is quite handy.

What is your role at Solidspace?

Today I’m just a director. I don’t have any active management in Solidspace. I am just there for board meetings.

That explains why you have time to work for your current company, Inhabit Homes. What is your business model for Inhabit Homes?

It has a few business streams. But the core of the business model is to build high quality, design led homes that are more affordable than some of the homes we built when I was working for Solidspace.

We built some lovely homes at Solidspace, but the reality is they are a premium product. That is almost inevitable as my experience is that good design costs more money. Whatever architects tell you, it is hard to avoid that. So what we do is build watertight structural shells that the owner can then fit out themself.

There are a couple of benefits to this:

First, it is cheaper for customers to fit out than it is for us because we have to include all the management costs, interest costs and the developer profit.

Second, they can choose what they want and how they want it. Rather than having us choose the colours and tiles for their kitchen they want, they can do it themselves. They can spend as much or as little time as they want.

Third, the owner has flexibility in the layout. If you sell someone a 1,000-square foot, they can decide for themselves whether they want three small bedrooms or two large bedrooms.

From our perspective, the benefit is that we get out of the project quicker and can move on to the next project. It also means we don’t have to deal with all the snags in a project that take up a lot of management time when doing a fit out.

At Inhabit Homes, do you employ architects or is architecture a commodity into which you buy?

We don’t employ architects within our company; we outsource the architecture. We do that at Solidspace as well. We like to bring in architects to do the job well and keep everything fresh and the design good. I also think it gives architects an opportunity to do interesting work. I’m a big believer in partnerships. I think of my partnership with an architect as similar to that of a movie director and movie producer. I am the producer and the architect is the director.

How do you carry out market research, and how do you find locations for your projects?

Land is very difficult to get in London so you can’t be that fussy. It’s generally gut instinct but it’s also massively influenced by the price of the land, our financial resources and where our customer base is. We have quite a lot of information on our customers and where they want to be, and we get a good sense of the kind of customer that likes our product. So obviously we try to build in those places.

At the moment, we tend to look in London but we’re also thinking about places outside London for the near future. For now, we’re busy trying to get our first projects off the ground in London.

Do Solidspace and Inhabit Homes ever interact?

Solidspace and Inhabit do quite a lot of work together. For example, Solidspace is building a very nice development not far away from Inhabit Homes’ office near London Bridge. Inhabit Homes is doing the marketing and sales for Solidspace. We are acting as their sales agency on that project because I think we have a very personal relationship with customers. When it comes to nicely designed products, people say, “I don’t want just a basic estate agent to sell it like they would sell any other products. They’ve got to be someone who knows what they’re talking about, someone who understands design and architecture.”

We’re collaborating with Solidspace but also with other clients. Right now, we are working on a project that was just launched in Holland Park, London, by Peter Salter. We are doing marketing and sales for that too.

Our core activity has been in acting as custom build developers, although I’m very interested to see whether or not we can bring Baugruppen (co-housing projects) to London.

Co-housing doesn’t yet exist in London?

No. The financing isn’t really there. Well, they do exist in some slightly strange forms but there are certainly very few of them and they certainly do not have any commercial perspective.

I found yet another company with your name on it: Crowdestates. When did you establish it and what was your goal for this business?

I’m involved with a couple of companies outside traditional property development. Crowdestates is a peer-to-peer lender, a little like crowdfunding for development finance. Small developers need access to finance and what they can borrow at the bank is quite expensive, up to 9% interest a year. The idea behind Crowdestates is to lend money collectively to small property developers at a lower interest rate than the bank.

And is Crowdestates also interacting with Inhabit Homes?

We’re still going through the regulatory authorisation process with Crowdestates. But yes, that is the intention. One of my grander visions is to create a company that does everything from beginning to end.

Another company of mine is called Patch Partners, which sources land opportunities. We train and support people to find development sites, to find old buildings that can be refurbished, or to discover a piece of ground on which to build houses. They go out and find these things themselves and we connect them with developers or investors to get the project up and going.

The vision is to work vertically, Sourcing opportunities through Patch Partners, financing them through Crowdestates, building and selling by Inhabit Homes.

I see! When I was doing my research and found all these companies you own, it made me wonder if you have more days in the week than the average person…

The companies are all connected. A lot of people say, “Don’t work for more than one company.” But I think, why not?

The market is different from how it was when you first started. How would you advise a fresh architecture graduate today on getting his first project off the ground? Any tips on how to manage it?

I think we’re living in amazing times. If you look at the costs of housing and land, they’re ridiculously high. But on the flipside, the costs of connecting and transparency are very low. For that reason, I think there’s never been a better time to create things like Baugruppen (co-housing projects) where communities can come together to buy developments.

I think that we’re going to see more and more of that because why should big companies be the ones buying the land?

Why not get ten of your friends and buy a bit of land together? Through the power of digital technology, you have the power to bring strangers together.

You don’t have to rely on your own networks. It has become much easier to network and to do radical things.

In a way, the barrier to entry into the market is higher because you need more money to buy land. But arguably the ability to find experts is much easier and comes at a lower cost. In the past, what were you going to do? How would you have found an air quality assessor? Now all you need to do is google them, right? In the past, it was a really painful process.

It is all about connectivity and ensuring that you think big when connecting with others.

You have worked a lot with architects. What do you think would help their profession?

I never trained as an architect. But what I see is that there are quite a lot of architects who are very impractical in terms of actually knowing how buildings are put together. Architecture is not just about the design process but also really understanding how a building is structured, for example, knowing what heavy rain or wind would do to it. That’s why I love it when I see architects who have built their own homes and have actually gone through the building process at least once.

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

Don’t be afraid. The key is to realise that there are always going to be risks and there will always be reasons to say no. But you have got to step into the unknown and try it or nothing will change.

Also, believe in yourself and be nimble. Read a lot, speak to a lot of people, and develop your network. There’s absolutely no reason why you shouldn’t succeed. This goes back to my earlier point. We live in a world where 24-year-olds can be billionaires. With the digital world, you don’t need to have been around for 60 years before you launch your first invention. You can just get on and do it. No one is stopping you.

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 architects and developers?

I think architects should think of themselves as collaborators rather than as passively waiting for commissions.

They need to think about their role in the process. They’ve got to go out and find opportunities, and get developers to partner with them and say, “Okay, how can we do this together?”

It’s a bit like my director and producer analogy. When a movie is at the beginning of development, producers, directors and writers will sometimes pitch to the studio together. It’s about building a team around an idea, and that doesn’t always have to come from one side. It can come from the architect who has recognized their role in the process.

I think architects will always be needed because they add a great deal of value, especially in terms of the products. But I think that these days, even if you’re in a practice,

you should be thinking about how you can be entrepreneurial and how you can do things differently.

About Gus Zogolovitch

Gus started his career at Goldman Sachs in London where he was an equity analyst before he set up his first property specialising in residential projects. He ran this venture for a couple of years alone before he joined his architect father, Roger, and set up Solidspace with the aim to deliver design-led boutique new-build projects on forgotten inner city gap sites. He pioneered the Solidspace split-level model by building his own house in north west London where he still lives today.

Gus has most recently started his own venture, Inhabit Homes, which acts as London’s first custom-build enabler, helping people build their own Grand Designs while also selling some of the most desirable new-builds in London. 

The post Investment Banking, Gap Site Development and Building New Homes – an Interview with Gus Zogolovitch appeared first on Archipreneur.

ASH NYC is a company that blends the world of interior design with property development. In addition to being designers/developers, they are placemakers, and they take their role in impacting the urban environment very seriously: “We are only interested in projects that we feel improve their host community, that make a positive impact on a neighborhood,” said Co-Founder and CEO Ari S. Heckman in an interview with Archipreneur. “We are drawn to renovations of historic buildings, often ones that are vacant or have some kind of undesirable. We find that people really enjoy connecting with a well-adapted historic building.”

I am sure you will connect with their latest conversion – 32 Custom House. The building is a historic landmark erected in 1875 and was acquired by ASH NYC in November 2014. Its bronze ground floor storefront, rope moldings and strongly accented facade demonstrate its High Victorian Gothic architectural qualities, and give it great distinction within the historic district.

ASH NYC has completely re-imagined, developed and designed the residential building, in partnership with Kite Architects and South Coast Improvement Company.  Now it comprises 10 apartments and one retail space on the ground floor. Unique amenities include a virtual doorman, private penthouse roof terrace, city and water views, and original historic details throughout – like two historic stairwells.

“We are our own client on our development projects”, Heckman continued in the interview, “which means that the design team has an equal seat at the table when major decisions are being made.”

And here are the designs, all images © ASH NYC:

Location:

32 Custom House St, Providence, RI 02903, USA

Project Data:

• Architects: ASH NYC
• 1,115 sqm (12,000 SF)
• 5 floors
• 10 apartments, 1 retail space
• includes two historic stairwells, one elevator

The post ASH NYC Re-Developed Historic Building, 32 Custom House, as Their Own Clients appeared first on Archipreneur.

Today, a majority of architects work solely on the design end of the development process. It is common knowledge that the net value of architectural services in a projects’ total value amounts to a very small percentage (it’s usually in single digits), which puts architects near the bottom of the financial structure in the AEC industry.

Stuck between developers, clients, contractors, and subcontractors, architects are usually in a role that implies great responsibility but proportionally low compensation for it. When we add to that the grievance of not having full control of a project, it becomes clear as to why an increasing number of architects either transition to real estate development or transform their design offices into design-builds.

Though still in its infancy, this transition seems indicative of an emancipatory trend that’s taking place, where architects take matters into their own hands and thus claim their rightful position within the industry.

However, with this newfound ambition comes a new set of challenges. Developing a project from drawing board to building site requires business skills that are not taught in architecture schools. Can architects bridge this gap and compete with seasoned developers? Are there advantages to being a designer when it comes to the nitty-gritty of actually building a project?

Let’s take a look the major pros and cons of architects working as developers.

Pros

#1 – Architects Understand the Process of Building

As architects come to learn about the different aspects of project development in the course of their education and throughout their career in the industry, most know what it takes to design and construct a building. They often have project management experience and understand the process of site and project analysis, construction techniques, acquiring building permits and controlling budgets.

This is particularly the case in smaller offices where project managers are often required to perform various roles, from leading the project team and administering construction contracts, through negotiating with clients and contractors, to scheduling and monitoring processes. Due to this versatility in their experience, architects can make sure that construction is completed on schedule and under budget.

In addition to these general skills and competencies, architects often become experts in various niches. Over the course of their careers, many practicing architects specialize in specific typologies, which can be a huge advantage when going into development in these specific areas.

#2 – Great Design Increases Market Value

The expertise that architects bring to the table can have a significant impact on the financial bottom line of a project. For example, sustainable design features can significantly increase the value of a property. Or, as Tyler Stonebreaker puts it in his interview on Archipreneur Insights: “At the end of the day, the market is placing the highest premium on things that are unique and special.”

People are becoming increasingly interested in energy efficient or high performance properties, which is why green design certification programs like LEED and NGBS can raise the selling price of a house. In addition to sustainability, experienced architects also know how to use designs to create quality spaces on limited budgets.

They can also reconcile profitmaking with a broader strategy for social change and an increased quality of life over a longer period of time. Architects that are working as property developers are more likely to consider innovative and creative solutions; solutions that ordinary developers might either overlook or reject.

#3 – Architects Know How Cities Work

Architects are trained to think in terms of place making instead of creating objects that are detached from their surroundings. An architect-developer is trained to consider how a project might sit within and relate to its context, ensuring long-term benefits for themselves, their clients and the relevant neighborhoods. Architects are taught to understand urbanism and recognize areas with development potential. They may, for example, see real opportunity in a vacant lot that doesn’t seem to offer any value to the untrained eye.

For example, San Diego-based architect-developer Jonathan Segal built many of his residential projects as suburban infill developments located on undesirable and oddly shaped lots. Over the years, Jonathan has created a profitable business and accumulated a wealth of architectural accolades in this area of his business.

Cons

#1 – Lack of Business Experience

Many architects know how to design, draw, write, interpret specifications and monitor construction processes, but know little about real estate finances, viable cash flow models, and how to understand a project from a business perspective. Those working in large architectural firms are restricted to the drawing board, receiving little on-the-job training when it comes to the particulars of business.

In addition to a general lack of business skills, most architects don’t know about the financial and business structures that developing properties entail. Understanding real estate finance and the metrics used to calculate and rate a development, along with the importance of overhead factors, are just as important as understanding building codes, zoning regulations and program. The majority of architects have yet to learn that cost is a principal parameter for their designs.

#2 – Getting Caught up in Design

With all their knowledge about the different aspects of getting a project built, architects are often stuck in a closed mindset, focused solely on design. They get overexcited about the design possibilities, and fail to acknowledge the importance of the business side of project development. There is still a general disregard for the financial part of building in architecture schools.

This attitude often continues into architects’ careers, as most continue to work solely as designers. Once they get into developing their own projects, they are forced to become more flexible and let various technical, logistical and financial factors inform their design decisions. This is often a hard pill to swallow for an architect.

#3 – Not Being Familiar with Market Trends

Shifts in market demand determine the properties that will be the most profitable to build. In order to know whether to focus on apartments, condos, mid-rise, mixed-use buildings, or other typologies, seasoned developers read the market and set about targeting the right demographic. There is a significant difference in returns between Build to Rent and Build for Sale.

The key to deciding on the type of structure to build – and where – is in accurately predicting if the asset will either increase or decrease in value over time. Developers also need to know how to read real estate trends and cycles to predict the best time for development, buying and selling. This can be a huge challenge for architects with no experience in property development.

***

Combining skills ranging from design to finance and marketing is definitely a daunting task. Still, an increasing number of architecture firms are broadening their reach to include designing, developing and even constructing their own projects. Architecture firms like SHoP, Alloy, BRH Architects, and EM2N Architects are proving that it is possible to strike a balance between good designs and making a profit.

The post Reasons Why Architects Can Make Great Developers (or not?) appeared first on Archipreneur.