. >> my name is alan fokugawa, i'm the building code analyst with the department of building inspection and one of my duties is to answer phones. over the course of a week i'll get many questions -- well, not many, many -- but many dwes regarding when do i need an architect? i'm doing the drawing. i'm doing a kitchen remodel; can i do that or do i need an architect? or i'm doing the interior remodel for a high rise office; can i do that or do i need an architect? to answer those questions, the topic of this talk is going to

be the why and how to hire an architect. >> i've put up on the screen which duplicates the andout a table of contents of what i hope we'll have time to talk about. five main subjects, why employ an architect, what the types of clients are who would engage an architect, because each of those types has different questions; how to choose an architect and as a detail of that, what to ask the architect's former clients when you interview them. and, finally, a little personal advertisement for architecture as a desired course for your children to study. i want to start out with the 3 reasons why someone would employ an architect. first, there are some strict

black letter legal requirements the california building code specifically states what building officials are supposed to look for as a minimum on plans submitted for approval and in many cases that will require the services of architects and engineers. additionally, the architects practice act of the state of california, 47 pages of fine type, states who may and who may not call themselves an architect, what you have to do to get there, and with the exception of some short lists of spelled out exclusions which i'm sure alan has to read off to people in response to those

questions, buildings are supposed to be designed by architects or other licensed professionals. to save alan that list of exclusions includes single family dwellings of wood frame construction, not more than two stories and basement in height; multiple dwellings containing no more than 4 dwelling units; garages and miscellaneous agricultural buildings. aside from that, you are looking for an architect or another licensed professional such as a structural engineer, to make permit application drawings simply to comply with

the law. the second reason you might want an architect working on your project is what i call navigate past obstacles. as an example, i'll give the state building code has 1/3 of a page devoted to when an architect is required. the san francisco building code amendments to the state code runs 4 pages on that one section. the san francisco planning code is now 3 fat looseleaf volumes and both of those codes, the building code and the planning code, are supplemented by published and unpublished interpretations, bulletins, policies of conditions and so

on. the result of this is that -- something dha maybe was much more simple a generation ago has become so complex administratively that a need has been created for what you might call a mandarin class of interpreters just to help people figure out what they need to do and how to make it happen. so that's another function of architects. the third category uplifted is, i like to think the most important, and that an architect can help make your project better than it would have been if you didn't have an architect. among the things that an architect can do is to help the client define and clarify

requirements and then look at many different options for how you can satisfy those requirements and we always hope that when we're doing that, we find some unexpected directions that the client would never have thought of. then as the project moves through the sequence of detailed design and administrative approvals and construction, the architect can help monitor and control costs and time expenditures, help them improve construction kault by just applying knowledge of materials and processes to the job and, finally, be there to be pushing for a project that, at the end, leaves the world a better place than when we started.

let me ask of those of you sitting out here, who has been a client of an architect? and would you classify yourself as a public client, a commercial client, or a private residential client? each of the three types of client has a different list of criteria and different order of importance for those criteria. clients for public or nonprofit projects have to be very concerned with accountability when, if they choose an architect for the new library, they have to be able to say why when the mayor comes around after it's filmed and so, how

do they saddle you with this thing? they have to go through formal procedures and are generally required by law to go through careful and formal procedures with respect to making the design commissions accessible and many other similar concerns. they also almost always have fixed schedules and fixed budgets that they must adhere to and everything in the process has to respect that. finally, we hope that their criteria include soifring the goal of civic pride for whatever is produced. commercial or industrial clients generally have as their bottom line, their bottom line.

almost everything about the project is tested against the question, will this hurt or help the profitability of my business? private residential clients are, in many ways, quite different from the other two classes. first of all, they have an immediate and on-going personal interest in the outcome of the project. you might say they are going to wear their house as you would wear a suit of clothes and it means just as much to them. so while they are always concerned with the practical aspects of a project, how many steps between the refrigerator and the sink, i think finally they are as concerned or more concerned with the symbolic aspects of the project.

what is this building or remodel do as possible that sends a picture of me out into the world. generally, they are looking for a measure of delight from the experience of using the finished building and maybe even from the process of cooking it up. and it is a rare client who isn't also concerned with cost and schedule. maybe you'd like to comment on that? . >> for those of you considering hiring an architect and doing a residential project, this is one of the most difficult aspects of embarking upon a project for the owner is -- and this is really where we tend to go -- sometimes it's (inaudible) it's to help you

establish very clear goals and keep your eye on the ball. because one thing that often happens is that costs and schedule go out the window when owners don't really trust the architect, they want to hold the pencil more. they don't understand. they know they need the architect, but that's fundamentally when people get into trouble. >> what you should expect from your architect is an ability to very quickly go through a lot of options that you can measure in that way. in other words, options that you can then assign a bottom line to and make a decision early on whether you are willing to invest $10 million in order to make your deal work, or whether it really

doesn't work unless it's only $5 million or $100,000. the architect is involved in all those decisions and you should expect your architect to help you find all of those possibilities. what happens as the process continues, you start with lots of possibilities and you gradually narrow down to fewer and fewer until you find the one that has the right balance for your project. >> and a lot of what we do in that process, fundamentally what we bring to the table in that process, is an understanding of not only what fits on a site and how to integrate the client's requirements on to the site, but we also look at the planning regulations and you we look at the building site and is this the right site to fulfill those needs.

it's not arbitrary. . >> this list of what to do to choose an architect will work pretty well for choosing a doctor or choosing an auto mechanic. it's just kind of a checklist. the first thing to do is find what names you should consider. it's been my experience that the overwhelming majority of people are most comfortable asking them they know, even though in my opinion that turns up the most uncertain results. but i think it is useful to ask anyone who might have an opinion on the subject, just generate a big list and always

ask the follow-up questions, why did you recommend that name? there are some official listings. the aia has a list that you can source online. i've actually a few calls over the years from the yellow pages and then, of course, there are publications all of the shelter magazines, where you might see the work of someone who appeals to you. all of these things are useful but just beginning to get a list of names that you want to start examining and sorting. i recommend strongly interviewing candidates rather than take anyone else's word who you should hire as an architect. and the things i would ask about is what experience have you had that would apply to my

job? and the follow-up that's really critical is when someone shows you a project that don't forget to say to them, well, tell me the story of this. why did you do it? why did you make it that way? rather than just being satisfied with an aactive image. the arc spekt should also provide you with contact sfartion for clients from past projects and i've devoted a separate page to how you can interview those clients. you also want to ask the architect about their capacity for timely performance. you know, is there present combination of staff size and workload adequate to get you what you want in the time you want it? it's very tempting to take on more work than you can handle, but i think most architects

would stop short of misrepresenting their ability to handle the work as you need it handled. you want to take about the fee arrangement and the fub would be details such as what are the billing rates, do you remember require a retainer on the fee, what are the terms of payment? and finally it's useful to know if an architect carries professional liability insurance. many don't. there are many clients and many projects where it is either more or less important but it's a good question to ask and you want to ask about the policy limits and whether they have a good claims history. generally speaking, an architect's former clients will be happy to talk to you. they have had a good job or a

bad experience with the job, one way or another, they are still going to want to tell somebody about it. the half a dozen categories that you i would have you quiz them on are -- sort of in order of importance, i think. listening: did the architect listen to your requirements or, better, help you disskufr and describe what your requirements are. sometimes people come to architects with -- an incredibly large range of skoerp definitions. sometimes it's somebody walking in and saying, look, i need two bedrooms and a bathroom, where's where it's going to go on her bed in the house. this of course you want to ask the client how was it working

with these person as a designer? astonishing. did the architect really surprise you in a positive way with where the project could be taken. it's important to know that the architect is any good at communicating both in terms of, you know, just a mechanical level. this is character returned phone calls to, are the communication color and our notes and records kept up so that you be not only know what's happening and can look back and see what has happened and try to figure out why you are where you are. you want to ask about technical skill as the client perceives it. does this architect demonstrate

being well-versed in building technology and codes? did the architect help steer you through the approvals process with kuk says and not too much pain? construction oversight is the effective in working with contractors, both when they are submitting bids for the project, and when they are actually executing the construction and, finally, when they are coming back to fix up what went wrong. and does the architect have interests and competence in helping you with cost control. you want to ask about the architect as a business person, simply were they open, fair and honest, did they do what they said they were going to do it.

and then overall of this, the personal aspect of did you get some pleasure out of working with this person and did you get some pleasure out of the results that came out of the process? . >> i have a question regarding using a licensed architect (inaudible). the fact that somebody has a license indicates they have taken the care to learn what they need to learn and sit for the exam and practice in a responsible way. and when i was starting my practice in 1992, i had come from new york doing high rise buildings so i was able to take on larger propers as that had been my background. these large projects ifts taking on were, by and large, fixing very, very dramatically remodeling houses that had been

designed by builders for very wealthy people. these clients had to approach builders who said -- and they can still do this in the state of california -- oh, we provide design. their architect is a person -- generally, it still goes on -- their architect is a person in house who might have majored in design work and the reason we've been brought in, people by the house, they shi, oh, isn't this great? 7,000 fair feet; it's so beautiful. then they move in and they find rooms don't have enough light or the kitchen is too rr rooms away from the giepbing room and they think they can decorate their way out of it and then the decorator gets in and says, oh, i want to start moving walls around.

what is the architect doing? i would say we're specialists in spatial thinking among other things and that is where the discipline really lies. there's never a guarantee you are going to find someone good, just like a doctor or a lawyer. there's no guarantee, taking the time to interview people is very important, but what the license insurer does not have that an unlicensed person can be anybody. >> the building department doesn't really care if you have a licensed person or not. the business and professions code of the state of california states that, in general, building wood frame residential buildings of no more than two stories in height can be done by anyone. they are called exempt

structure. as far as, you can get 4 units into a wood structure. the california architects' board also gives the building department a little bit of leeway in determining whether that person or that structure can be done by anyone other than an architect because they are kind of interested in the safety of the structure. even though it says wood structure, what we're looking for is something called conventional light framed structures. it's got to be 16 inches on center. now, a wood structure might also be post and continue der construction where you have posts in a very small plan. in that case we would ask you to take it to an architect. we would as the building