Why I shifted to a "Design/Build" practice

I had been teaching Architectural Design at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo for 7 years or so, when my life, and career took some radical turns. 

Just as I was becoming eligible for the much-revered tenure: 

• I resigned from my teaching position. 
• my beloved son, age 19, died. 
• my wife (of 20 years) and I divorced. 

With a resultant mid-life crisis in full force, 

• I remarried. 
• added a general residential contractor’s license to my resumé. 
• moved north 200 miles. 
• and began a design/build business—designing what I build and building what I design.

While high-quality residential architectural design services continued to be respected and desired, their increasing costs were forcing clients to lower their standards and find alternative approaches for design. General contractors—who were never trained for design and who initially did not, in general fact, want the responsibility—became the easiest, most direct recourse. They liked the idea of increased profits, of course, and since designing was being placed so directly in their laps, they became convinced of their competence to the task. Besides, even a moderately naïve public would have a hard time grasping the difference.

Design/build as a basic service readily became a new and viable option. Its overall discipline was little different from before, with simply the architect’s role almost seemingly usurped by the contractors. Their limited design skills could draw upon essentially only mundane repetitions of the ultra-conservative, “tried and true” conventionality, whether very meaningfully viable or not. Their services were, almost invariably, certainly simple, straightforward, and economical, yet equally dull, under- inspired, and mediocre. Resolutions of sorts, but in name only.

Design/build, however, had great appeal to my particularly seasoned interests, objectives, and skills. Above all, it allowed me to readily achieve a “practice” of residential design that I so deeply yearned for. In addition, being in direct control of both roles immediately eliminated any of the usual conflicting between them two. I would be at the jobsite at most times, and easily available for consultation. Being a licensed contractor even eliminated the need for an architect’s license and its prohibitive “errors and omissions” insurance premiums and other related responsibilities. Now, project problems could easily be addressed directly and dealt with immediately, allowing the job to proceed without the usual interruptions, conflicts, even lawsuits. Most clients, from their own interests, found my services equally appealing. Here, they could enjoy extensive architectural services as the “old days” at essentially no extra charge.

Since all buildings need some kind or degree of design and construction documents determined to facilitate fundamental cost analysis, permit-getting and construction procedure, my services were no more complex than my competition, yet with the benefit of my architectural design skills. This, combined with honest, reasonable pricing standards, made for a very “competitive” package. Everyone was happy.

More broadly considered, the deeper issues of design/build seemed “only natural”; that the two realistically belonged together, and, in the distant past, that’s how they were generally conducted. Those doing the designing were most appropriate when they also did the construction—thus eliminating the possibility for any counterproductive detachment from its procedural reality.

While there are a few alternate ways to practice design/build—singly as was my case, a partnership, a key employee, etc.—it is not appropriate for everyone. Some may not be willing and/or able, at any given time, to address its many prerequisites. Perhaps, at a different time, they can. My two services, however, were uniquely compatible and fell together naturally into a solid package of offerings that quickly found themselves “sought after” and successful. As far as I know, I became the only one in my community who offered such and was essentially never without significant commissions and clientele.