We do this for almost every single project and typically include it as part of our SD or DD fees. I would never outsource this because it is a crucial service we offer to our client and I would hate to give it up to some random 3rd party wanker.
Haha, yes, it's how the valuable clients know I will propose something that's legal and buildable. Once he tells his pals I'm really good at due diligences he'll send them my way. BTW we do this for realtors ALL THE TIME and they send us their clients ALL THE TIME.
A site survey generally shows you easements, and I always have the client procure the survey directly. This is for every project.
I've never outsourced the research, as said above it's really integral to understanding the site and thus being able to design for it. But I *have* outsourced the application process for any re-zonings or variances.
And I have outsourced the historic designation implications research once, then I understood it well enough. But if it was a historically complex site with a lot of existing buildings and perhaps a controversial past - for example, a mental asylum from the 1870s - I'd hire an archivist researcher to do it.
I have seen this done in jurisdictions where the zoning processes are usually problematic, controversial or otherwise contentious, like many in Cali. But the preliminary research is essential to getting things right and it is a scary proposition to hand that responsibility off to a third party.
I have also witnessed many planning consultants getting things very wrong, holding up the process, needing much hand-holding on the part of the Architects and overall having very poor performance.
It is important that architect and consulting planner are on the same wave-length and can work well together, and that usually starts with impeccable performance.
Many portions of an architect's work are now outsourced to various consultants in projects that feature some kind of complexity - be it technological, political, legal etc. Your typical starchitect firm might not even produce any drawings - their executive architects and consultants will do that work, translating Enscape renders and sketches into construction drawings. Same goes for code consultants, energy consultants, life safety consultants etc.
The starchitect is hired for their band and "vision", which the executive firms do not provide.
life safety and code and building envelope consultants are becoming so standard an expectation from owners that you should include it in your fees anyway and if you do it in-house, capture it as additional profit
This is very true, buildings are more complicated and complexed than ever before ( think thermal , fire safety , etc) resulting in the reduction of architects core services. We have lost project management to CM/PM decades ago and it seems to me that this trend is getting worse. We need a big shift in what we do going fwd if we want to stay relevant.
Over / out
Aug 24, 23 3:30 am ·
·
joseffischer
funny enough, I made the switch to work with a design build firm, historically construction that added architecture in the 90s... let me tell you, they are collecting that fat PM/responsibility check without the experience or knowledge to back it up. We sell this 'coordination effort' service as part of Design/build as an additional service during CA which is basically a bunch of architectural staff on site in job trailers doing their traditional CA responsibilities while also acting like project engineers (the term for field guys) and associate PMs under the construction leads. It's fascinating
This service exists in various forms in several regions. Here in the PNW we have an online tool (requires subscription) that has been serving Portland & Seattle for a couple years. It's useful for a quick hit, but isn't reliable from a liability/integrity perspective of contractual obligations.
This sort of service is most useful for developers to do quick studies or architects who work for developers doing quick studies (ie, that aren't studied reliable deep dives & would need an appropriate deep study if pursued further).
In the scenario of this service as a reliable consultant, this may be most useful for very large projects with lots of moving parts (multiple properties with varying/conflicting zoning requirements or jurisdictional requirements) where an architect may want to generate options for review without burying their own staff in that kind of chaos.
1) Zoning and Land use are generally a pretty interesting part of the process and some of the better buildings are clever in their use of this. It's hard to be clever if you're sourcing this out to generic results. The architect really needs to understand the details if they're working in difficult environments and trying to maximize value to the client (such as New York City).
2) Every project. So often, or not. Some projects take years.
3) We read the local codes and any supplemental documents.
I take it you're trying to create a product to make this easier? You're probably better off targeting developers for early studies and Phase Zero type stuff. Similar to Testfit.io. We actually have to be correct on stuff like this and I doubt you will also be providing professional liability insurance for projects that used your services.
Outsourcing land use restriction research
For all architects...
1) Is land use restriction (zoning, HOA, easement, etc.) research a time-consuming, undesirable, or lengthy process?
2) How often do you need to do this?
3) Do you use any services currently to do this?
Thanks!
We do this for almost every single project and typically include it as part of our SD or DD fees. I would never outsource this because it is a crucial service we offer to our client and I would hate to give it up to some random 3rd party wanker.
Haha. So you rather keep reading through land use ordinances instead of getting more clients?
Haha, yes, it's how the valuable clients know I will propose something that's legal and buildable. Once he tells his pals I'm really good at due diligences he'll send them my way. BTW we do this for realtors ALL THE TIME and they send us their clients ALL THE TIME.
OP, the subtext here I think is that outsourcing this work will greatly reduce it's value. For so many reasons.
Thanks, helpful to know. What if a service that was accurate could help you do it faster and thus more?
Accuracy is only one of those reasons.
Doubtful you’d be able to do it any faster or better than I can, zoned.
Isn't this a big part of actually being an architect?
Do you out source your husband / wife duties too?
Do you outsource your outsourcing?
So you do all of your own math vs using a calculator?
Do you draft everything by hand vs drafting software?
This is the only reason architects use calculators.
A site survey generally shows you easements, and I always have the client procure the survey directly. This is for every project.
I've never outsourced the research, as said above it's really integral to understanding the site and thus being able to design for it. But I *have* outsourced the application process for any re-zonings or variances.
And I have outsourced the historic designation implications research once, then I understood it well enough. But if it was a historically complex site with a lot of existing buildings and perhaps a controversial past - for example, a mental asylum from the 1870s - I'd hire an archivist researcher to do it.
I have seen this done in jurisdictions where the zoning processes are usually problematic, controversial or otherwise contentious, like many in Cali. But the preliminary research is essential to getting things right and it is a scary proposition to hand that responsibility off to a third party.
I have also witnessed many planning consultants getting things very wrong, holding up the process, needing much hand-holding on the part of the Architects and overall having very poor performance.
It is important that architect and consulting planner are on the same wave-length and can work well together, and that usually starts with impeccable performance.
Many portions of an architect's work are now outsourced to various consultants in projects that feature some kind of complexity - be it technological, political, legal etc. Your typical starchitect firm might not even produce any drawings - their executive architects and consultants will do that work, translating Enscape renders and sketches into construction drawings. Same goes for code consultants, energy consultants, life safety consultants etc.
The starchitect is hired for their band and "vision", which the executive firms do not provide.
life safety and code and building envelope consultants are becoming so standard an expectation from owners that you should include it in your fees anyway and if you do it in-house, capture it as additional profit
This is very true, buildings are more complicated and complexed than ever before ( think thermal , fire safety , etc) resulting in the reduction of architects core services. We have lost project management to CM/PM decades ago and it seems to me that this trend is getting worse. We need a big shift in what we do going fwd if we want to stay relevant.
Over / out
funny enough, I made the switch to work with a design build firm, historically construction that added architecture in the 90s... let me tell you, they are collecting that fat PM/responsibility check without the experience or knowledge to back it up. We sell this 'coordination effort' service as part of Design/build as an additional service during CA which is basically a bunch of architectural staff on site in job trailers doing their traditional CA responsibilities while also acting like project engineers (the term for field guys) and associate PMs under the construction leads. It's fascinating
@zoned
This service exists in various forms in several regions. Here in the PNW we have an online tool (requires subscription) that has been serving Portland & Seattle for a couple years. It's useful for a quick hit, but isn't reliable from a liability/integrity perspective of contractual obligations.
This sort of service is most useful for developers to do quick studies or architects who work for developers doing quick studies (ie, that aren't studied reliable deep dives & would need an appropriate deep study if pursued further).
In the scenario of this service as a reliable consultant, this may be most useful for very large projects with lots of moving parts (multiple properties with varying/conflicting zoning requirements or jurisdictional requirements) where an architect may want to generate options for review without burying their own staff in that kind of chaos.
1) Zoning and Land use are generally a pretty interesting part of the process and some of the better buildings are clever in their use of this. It's hard to be clever if you're sourcing this out to generic results. The architect really needs to understand the details if they're working in difficult environments and trying to maximize value to the client (such as New York City).
2) Every project. So often, or not. Some projects take years.
3) We read the local codes and any supplemental documents.
I take it you're trying to create a product to make this easier? You're probably better off targeting developers for early studies and Phase Zero type stuff. Similar to Testfit.io. We actually have to be correct on stuff like this and I doubt you will also be providing professional liability insurance for projects that used your services.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.