A Little Background
Prior to taking up this development project, I had been working in the tech industry as an Information Technology manager... over in California. I had no prior working knowledge in building & construction; I had no prior familiarity with the Philadelphia real estate market. What lead me to move to the City of Philly and try my share with property development? Here's what comes to mind... the desire to return back East - after living eight years in California; the desire to be closer to family - in close proximity to New York and Washington DC; the desire to break from a career path - I worked in IT for over 10 years and was ready for a change of pace; the desire to explore new territory - Philadelphia offered unchartered soil; and the desire to take on a new interest - I now had some time on my hands and was ready for a new form of creative energy. Besides, the Philadelphia real estate market was ripe with opportunity, in 2004 property value continued its steady rise. The Philly market did not seem as inflated as Los Angeles, San Francisco, or New York, but was certainly moving in that direction. Who knows how long the pendulum would swing, it seemed like the right time to strike. Up until recently, I had no interest in purchasing a home or property - I was always a renter. This worked well for my situation of constant mobility. Then all the sudden, by moving to Philadelphia, I knew it was time. The desire was there, the timing was right, and it was time to establish a home base, a place to call home. As you will see shortly, what was supposed to be a simple task multiplied into a beast of a project. Fortunately, I was in a position to welcome it and take it on fully. Fortunately, it would become a massive learning experience, one that can be shared with you. I hope what is written here provides flavor and insight into the project with nuggets of information that you can walk away with. My goal is to give you a peek into the process itself. I hope you enjoy!!
Selecting a Property
Property selection comes down to how well you know what you want and the realtor you're working with. If you're uncertain or hesitant about what you want, your realtor will have a difficult time helping you; likewise, if you're working with a lousy realtor, you'll have a difficult time finding the site of your dreams. Effective property hunting starts with a realtor who you get along with. Paramount is a realtor who listens to you, understands your needs, and begins to show you properties that only fall within your scope of interest. Take your time interviewing realtors, be careful with those who try to pin you down into exclusivity. Look for positive chemistry. For me, I spent many afternoons with multiple real estate agents before making my final selection. In fact, the process started long before I moved to Philadelphia - I conducted many phone interviews to screen down to three candidates. My leads came from either word of mouth or searches over the Internet. Face time, after arriving in Philly, allowed me to narrow down the choice from three to one. In the end, I selected Brigit Brust (who at the time was working for the Atacan Group but now works for CREI). She was the most polite and professional, and she patiently showed me property after property. She was knowledgeable about the City which was helpful for me since I was new to the area. I believe it was Brigit's infinite patience that allowed us to successfully work together.
[Incidentally, one of the three agents I did not select was coined an 'EBA' - an Exclusive Buyers Agent, something I had never heard of before. It smelled fishy, and I just didn't buy into the concept. After meeting this particular EBA gentleman at a deli in downtown Philly (and listening to him rant on for an hour and a half about how special his service was, using a binder that must have been at least 30 years old), he explained to me that in order for us to work together he would require a $1,000 deposit and exclusivity contract. That was plain nuts and a huge turnoff for me. In theory, EBAs are supposed to "guarantee" representation and negotiation on a buyer's behalf, have "ethical" obligations, expose and investigate a property's 'hazards', and ultimately save the buyer thousands of dollars. As far as I see it, they get paid by the seller through the listing broker's commission, so the financial incentive is the same as a non-EBA. I just don't get it, I don't see the value in locking into an EBA. Maybe it was the guy's void of a social presence, or maybe it was his outdated suite and tie. Either way, I went running for the door as soon as I had the opportunity.]
Back to Brigit... communicating your search criteria helps the process a great deal; but in my case, the only adjectives I was able to muster were "unique", "spacious", and "in good shape". I wanted to avoid a property that required too much rehabilitation time, I wanted something I could easily move into. We must have visited over 100 homes before stumbling onto the final one. For my price range, I found most of the homes to be too narrow and too tight of quarters. These were generally from the 1800s. A first attempt on a home fell short when the owner changed his mind hours before the settlement, much time was wasted. Then I turned down a gorgeous home that had everything I was looking for since I wasn't happy with its location in the neighborhood. At last I was interested in this castle of a house that sat on a corner near Penn University. The house was unquestionably unique and spacious; it was, however, in poor shape and my hesitation came from the amount of work that would be required to renovate it. On the very same day, Brigit brought me to a vacant Medical building next to the Benjamin Franklin Parkway that had just come onto the market. Taking a huge gamble, she walked me through the unassuming facility. On the second floor, at the moment I reached the front of the building, with the sunlight pouring through the windows and a view of the Parkway, I knew this was the place for me. An offer went in that day and shortly thereafter it was accepted. It was a done deal. The success of this settlement came down to a good partnership with the realtor: good communication & good chemistry. I credit Brigit for pushing the boundaries and showing me places that were typically unconventional. In the end, I surprised even myself by changing my game plan - selecting a property that would require much rehabilitation time. This one would have to be radically converted from the ground up. Was I nervous? Sure. Was this completely outrageous? Certainly. Was it doable? Absolutely. I was more excited than anything else. Here sat a property at the heart of the museum district, that touched the Parkway, with the potential to become a beautiful contribution to a growing neighborhood.
Determining Direction & Purpose
But how? How would this new property become a beautiful contribution to this growing neighborhood? What would it even be converted into? What were my options? Here I had just purchased land with a working medical facility on top. The path of least resistance would lead me to populate the building with doctors, open the doors to its pharmacy, and lease it; the building was already subdivided for HVAC, electrical, security, and telephone zones. (Actually, the quickest bang-for-the-buck would have been to throw it back onto the market - after six months, the land value had significantly jumped! And I had already received a few offers.) But that was not the direction I wished to take, I was set on using this land as the future site of my home. I had no interest in retaining the medical practice nor did I wish to part with the deed. Somehow it had to be redeveloped. Although an obvious choice, conversion into apartments and condominiums seemed too ordinary and drab - I was looking for something with pizzazz!! Spring Garden street was already head-to-toe in condominiums and apartments. Somehow I wanted to take advantage of the building's relationship - its location - with the Park that sat directly across the street. With a growing number of residents in the neighborhood, what screamed out to me was more commercial space for the community, one that provided a positive contribution. I envisioned my property erected with community-orientation at its focal point. After months of idea tossing, I decided on a ground-floor commercial space with my home built on top. It was the June 15th 2004 issue of the Philadelphia Daily News that helped plant the seed. The paper was entitled "PICTURE THIS - MAKING THE PARKWAY COME ALIVE... A SPECIAL 24-PAGE REPORT... Reasons to 'people the Parkway', How to make it happen, Map of what it could be, and Connecting the Parkway to West Philly - and the whole city." [See graphics to right]. The editor, Zachary Stalberg, wrote: "Conceived in the century before last and built early in the next, it remains a great, often empty, unrealized dream. But because of the work of a lot of good people you will read about in the Rethinking Philadelphia report, and the hoped-for addition of the Barnes collection, Philadelphia now has a second chance to create a sweeping magnet... with reborn Parkway institutions at the heart of it all." What I faced was an opportunity to be a part of a city rebirth; I envisioned people (bikers, runners, park-dwellers, families, museum-goers, neighbors) having a new place to take part of and enjoy. At around the same time, I was in talks with the Historical Commission at City Hall, gathering information about the site, the area, policies and regulations (since the building itself sat on an historic block). I met a staff member who recommended the most perfect history book for the Parkway: "Building the City Beautiful - The Benjamin Franklin Parkway and the Philadelphia Museum of Art". The answer was clear - build the city beautiful. I now had a purpose. What came next was finding an architect to climb aboard.
Selecting an Architect
Like all thorough research, picking an architect requires a great deal of due
diligence. Half of the matchmaking is the architect selecting you - so you need
to be extra careful on who you pick (ie, watch out for architects who say "yes,
we can do the job"
to gain business rather than looking for an appropriate fit). The more you inquire, the better your
chance of a successful fit. As you meet the architects and their firms, listen
to your gut instinct. Take copious notes because even minor details may make a
difference. The very first step in architect selection is determining your
criteria. Architectural firms come in various sizes and areas of expertise, so
start thinking about what is most important to you and most appropriate for your
project. Criteria selection comes down to:
Chemistry - your comfort level with the firm. To me, this was the
most critical factor because chemistry sets the tone for the business
relationship; this is a must in my book.
Resources - does the firm have the staff & time to take on the
job? Do they have the specific expertise in-house that is required? Are you
comfortable with their head count?
Familiarity - has the firm previously worked on projects similar
to yours? Are they familiar with the type of work required? Here it's a good
idea to review staff resumes.
Location - does the firm have an office nearby or are they working
from afar? Architects are certainly capable of working remotely, but keep in
mind that these individuals might not be familiar with local zoning laws, local
incentive programs, or local builders and vendors.
Cost - each firm should provide a ballpark estimate for
the total cost of the project, which is typically broken down into architectural
service fee + construction cost. Unfortunately, no two proposals are alike so
be prepared on comparing apples to oranges. Some firms charge by the hour others
by percentage. Also note: architects are not cost estimators!! They are
designers, but will do the best job they can to estimate the total cost of the
job. Know that until a cost estimator is brought into the picture and/or a
contractor gives their bid, total costs are just rough estimates. Sometimes you
can estimate construction cost by knowing cost/sq. foot. For example, to build a
2,000 sq. ft. home at a construction cost of $250.00/sq. ft. would require
approximately $500,000.00. Construction costs will vary depending on location
and contractor selected.
The next step in architect selection is actually going out and meeting them. But
where do you start? The answer, I believe, is in networking - and keeping all
your options open. I started by asking family & friends, coworkers & contacts
for personal recommendations. Promising leads came from my loan officer, a
municipal employee, an article in the city magazine, my realtor, and a matching
service on the Internet called
Service Magic. Service Magic is
an online service that tries to pair the most qualified (and pre-screened)
service-providers to your job based on your search criteria; I found it to be a
handy tool that quickly put me in touch with local architects. But good old
fashioned chit-chat was the most effective tool overall. Once the leads came in,
phone interviews and initial screening followed. Company websites proved helpful
for quick reference. After an interest was established, more formalized
interviewing took place either at the firm's office or at the project site. An
office visit typically included a Q&A session, followed by a presentation or
pitch and a packet you could take home with you. However, I chose my initial
meetings at my property, where I could walk the architects around the grounds,
pointing out specifics and answering questions. This worked well because I could
witness how the architect thought and reacted to different situations (..."What
are the challenges to indoor parking?", "How do you bring light into an oblong
building?", etc.). Over a period of four months, I met with ten architecture
firms. Only a few met my requirements: good chemistry + large sized firm +
experience with historical zoning + strong mix of commercial & residential
development. What I realized after narrowing down my choices was that I was left
with a win-win situation, many firms are capable of doing the same job, there
is no one-solution to a puzzle, it came down to who I was most comfortable
with. My final selection went to
spg3. The due
diligence process included:
Interviewing - start with phone interviews followed by as much
face-time as needed. Meet other members of the firm, including senior principles
and those who may be assigned to your project.
Client Checks - obtain a list of client references
you can call to get some feedback on the firm's working habits, strengths &
weaknesses.
Project Checks - take a look at completed sites to
get a good idea of style and results.
Resume Reviews - collect staff resumes for
educational background and work history.
Proposal Review - ask to collect a proposal for the
job. It should include a breakdown of cost by phase. Make sure all phases that
you are interested in are included.
A contract is signed upon selection. This is where a lawyer can come in handy to ensure that you are as protected from the project program as the architect is. You see, your contract is most likely a derivative of the American Institute of Architect's 1997 B141 (Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Architect) agreement - which was written by architects for the architects. A good lawyer will update the B141 so everyone is covered satisfactorily; it is always a good idea to have someone you know who is familiar with contracts or a lawyer review your contract before signing it. For legal assistance, I worked with Kevin Watson from Cohen Seglias Pallas Greenhall & Furman. I enjoyed working with Kevin, he was thorough and explained the specifics clearly and in a timely fashion. In actuality, I did not rush into a B141 agreement with spg3. Rather, we agreed on a 'trial run' to flush out a few unknowns (such as zoning issues & programmatic details). This gave each side the opportunity to 'test-fit' one another. A short time later, owner and architect had an accord.
Setting a Program
With the contract signed, the project had now officially begun. The B141 laid out the basic layout and general theme behind what I was trying to achieve - a 30,000 ft. birds-eye objective. But over the course of the next several months, the goal would be to drill down and bring design detail into greater focus, ultimately resulting in a completed Construction Document that could be handed over to the Builder. Work would require constant cooperation between owner and architect. Our first step was to get all my ideas out on the table. This is where I would amble in and plunk down a huge binder or scrapbook of design ideas to share with the architects, but this was something I did not have (...for I believe this is a genetic flaw considering my sister loves doing this type of exercise). Regardless, the architects must get inside your head and understand what it is that you see. Dialogue allows ideas to spill out onto paper. Project goals and priorities are spelled out, details on what is important and what is not are discussed, particulars and the obscure are articulated. Architects must have input from the client in order to create something that is appealing to them; the architect works for the client, and as such, has a responsibility to ultimately create the client's vision. A client who does not communicate their wants, desires, and particulars is doing a disservice to the project and everyone involved. Therefore: know that architects are not mind-readers... if you think it, speak it. In my case, we scheduled a meeting to discuss my intentions and vision. I brought forth a few notes, some ideas, and some sketches - enough to form a basic picture. I provided some photos of modern architecture from homes I had recently visited and from homes on the web. And also showed a few picture clippings from magazines such as Metropolitan Home, Natural Home & Garden, Dwell, and Architectural Digest to give some visual ideas. My approach was to articulate basic space requirements and a general outline of the building, leaving the rest to the architect. High-level project goals were defined as follows:
More specific priorities included: a meditation room, extra sound insulation throughout, radiant flooring, bamboo floors, deconstruction handling of the building, solar cells, etc etc. With everything out on the table, spg3 had a starting point. The program was initially set and work could begin. Spg3 would work on two designs, present them, get feedback from me, take the best elements from each and go through the cycle again. We did this a few times until we hit a design that worked. This completed the Schematic Design phase. Normally design would continue through Design Development until Construction Documents were completed and handed over to the builder (or group of potential builders) for bidding. But considering the scope of this project, we felt this would be a good time to take a barometer reading on the cost. So a cost estimate was issued. The tricky part, however, would be to get an accurate quote - how does one come up with a cost estimate when the details are missing? (One way, I learned, is by wag... or wild ass guess!!) There were no Construction Documents so we worked off of sketches, a zoning summary, and a verbal description. We did our best and the cost estimator did their best to accurately reflect the job. The price came back and it was well over budget. "Shocker!!" - an old co-worker used to facetiously say. It was a good thing we issued a cost estimate at this point in time... well over my budget... before we were knee-deep in Design Development. It was time to reevaluate & rethink some factor of the project program to cut cost. This was part of the architectural cycle and fortunately covered in the owner-architect agreement. I would continue to work with the architect to scale back and revise the program until we felt enough changes were made to reflect a (significant) drop in cost. This process - of reevaluating and rethinking design to cut cost - is called 'Value Engineering'. It seems to be an inevitable step - I mean, how can an architect take a client's idea, put it down on paper and certify construction cost will fall within budget?! (Especially when material costs fluctuate like the wind!) Like I said earlier, architects are not cost estimators; they are masters at converting vision into reality.
A Hybrid Approach
At about the same time spg3 was selected to serve as architects, I had decided on another firm - Re:Vision Architecture - to handle the sustainability piece. Re:Vision would act as environmental consultants to the job. Re:Vision was selected because of their 100% commitment to 'green' architecture. I wanted on staff expertise in sustainable development and spg3 did not have in-house representation. Re:Vision is an architecture firm based in Philadelphia so they were familiar with the City territory, rules, policies, processes, specialty funding, grants, and were connected to a vastly growing network of sustainable design professionals. One of the challenges of this project would be to fuse together the two architecture firms without harming design development. Spg3 would serve as lead but all design would filter through Re:Vision. This way the two worlds of Architectural Design & Sustainable Design could be blended at the same time (working in parallel) rather than layered one over the other (working linearly). This is a noteworthy point: sustainable design is most rewarding when integrated from the beginning of a project rather than treated as an afterthought or addressed at the end. In some cases, such as in using fluorescent light bulbs, very little integrative design is required. But for large-scale systems, such as geothermal heating & cooling, design integration is a must. Sustainable design is as much part of the integrity of the building as any other design element. Therefore, it was critical that members of Re:Vision and spg3 worked well together. During the interview process, I brought these two work forces together to meet and to get to know one another. One of the reasons I selected spg3 was that Sean O'Rourke, the lead architect on the project, was amenable to the idea of working with a 3rd party for the environmental piece. Re:Vision was selected because I could see Scott Kelly & Jenn Rezeli were true leaders on the sustainable frontier and very excited about the project. The two firms got along, there was good synergy, they understood my intentions, and work quickly began as a newly established hybrid team.
How did I find Re:Vision Architecture? As I stated above in Selecting an Architect, networking is the key. It's a long story, but essentially I was in Pittsburgh visiting a house that was recently completed and praised for its modern structure and marveled for its (10,000 sq ft) size. It sat on the top of Ft Washington overlooking downtown Pittsburgh and was designed in such a way that from the street level, one would never suspect the house exploded in size as it worked its way down the grade of the hilltop. It also had a private driveway entrance so one could not appreciate its modern details until entering the palace-sized structure. The place was owned by friends, Peter and Steve, and it was my first visit. The house had been featured in Sound & Vision magazine's June 2004 edition so I knew it was loaded with bells and whistles. I was excited to see the architecture, to learn about modern design, to get a chance to speak with the owners and talk about their experience since they were involved in the design and build process. It just so happened that on the same evening of my visit, Peter and Steve were hosting a John Kerry fundraiser event. So while pinning on a Kerry button I learned that Peter and Steve frequently outsourced their home for community events; it was built to accommodate several hundred people comfortably. That night, the house was host to approximately 250 folks. I could go on about the level of detail that went into their home, from custom cabinetry to tile work to an elaborate wine cellar. Essentially Peter and Steve did not compromise when it came to design decisions, the place shouts of extraordinary detail. That night, I met Pennsylvania's Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Kathleen McGinty, who works alongside Governor Edward Rendell. (The same evening I also met Andre Heinz & Franco Harris.) I had the opportunity of speaking with Katie - as her friends called her - and briefly asking her about Philadelphia architecture firm recommendations. I mentioned that I wanted to build a 'green' home, so she introduced me to Rebecca Flora (executive director of Green Building Alliance) who was also at the event. Rebecca gave me Lorna Rosenberg's contact information (at the time, executive director Delaware Valley Green Building Council), who's group covered the Philadelphia region. A few days later, I contacted Lorna who advised me of several area 'green' firms. Re:Vision Architecture was the one that clicked; it was a relatively young firm filled with talent and positive energy.
Value Engineering - The Charrette
Around the time I hit this financial speed bump was the time Re:Vision Architecture introduced me to the concept of a charrette. I immediately embraced the idea. Re:Vision stepped forward to run the show. I could not have asked for a better authority on the subject - it was at this time that Jenn Rezeli of Re:Vision was giving a presentation on the subject of charrettes at USGBC's 2005 Greenbuild in Atlanta. To gain a better understanding of what a charrette was all about, Jenn invited me to a local Philadelphia charrette they were hosting for Mercy Neighborhood Ministries. I gratefully accepted and sat in on day two and three of the event. The object was to convert a 32,000 sq ft vacant warehouse into a vibrant community center (...click here to view invitation). I was in for a surprise!! Here I was, a complete stranger to both the project and to the neighborhood, and there I was on my first day at the design session participating in the evolution of the project - actually giving my input and ideas. Completely amazing. Completely empowering. The collaborative brainstorming session brought me closer to the community and to the individual nuns. The charrette platform opened the floor to everyone, allowing ideas to pour in, casting a sculpture made up of collective thought. There were three design teams in all, each going through its own iterative process, each reaching its own level of priorities and design highlights, each resulting in a design solution with strengths & weaknesses. Re:Vision made sure there was a design professional in each group to help maintain foundational support. It was beautiful watching everyone playing a role in the development cycle, in the creation of their new facility. On the second day, there was a public presentation of the three schematics, drawings cleaned up and ready for viewing. The greater neighborhood was invited to attend and in a sense, a larger collective body gave its feedback on the three designs. From this cycle, a new design would be established incorporating the best of all worlds. Even a local city representative showed up, prompting news coverage of the event.
A few weeks later - with 14 participants onboard with the idea - it was time to execute a charrette for my project. This was new territory and also a gamble since I was financing the charrette. I was hopeful and excited and believed a charrette would prove useful in achieving value engineering objectives. I wanted everyone on the team (that is, all participants) to experience something new and see for themselves the power of a collaborate effort. It gave me great pleasure to provide this opportunity to everyone who accepted. And to my surprise some of these folks came aboard volunteering their time, pro bono. Unlike a typical charrette that spans multiple days, this charrette would only last a single day: a morning session to review cost-cutting strategies and an afternoon breakout session, split into two teams, to play with design ideas. To streamline the one-day event, charrette objectives and a 'homework assignment' were sent to each participant prior to the event. Each participant was asked to submit at least three cost-cutting ideas. This way an organized collection of ideas could be presented at the start of the charrette and time wisely spent prioritizing them. At this point, Bill Craig of Re:Vision stepped in as team lead and lead most of the discussion. Participants included: a builder, architects from Re:Vision, architects from spg3, a Philly University professor, a University of Penn landscape architecture/city planning student, a construction waste management specialist, an MEP, structural engineers, my father, and myself. The objective was defined as follows: To re-work the schematic design to bring it in-line with the owner’s budget while optimizing important programmatic, aesthetic and sustainable features. Cost reduction strategies as a result of this charrette included:
The second half of the day consisted of breaking into two design teams: Base Plan & Blue Sky. The Base Plan team focused on existing schematics to make incremental ("modest, tactical") changes whereas Blue Sky was given the freedom to design from scratch with little boundary ("to make more sweeping changes"). Similar to the Mercy Neighborhood charrette, final designs were completed and presented at the end of the day. Unlike the Mercy Neighborhood charrette, we only had an afternoon to focus on design but enough ideas emerged to give us direction to make significant changes to the existing plan. Spg3 was able to return to the drafting table with a bucket full of new ideas. I would say that the charrette was a sweeping success!! And it was only one day of everyone's time. I felt that through this process of focusing as a group, we took an existing plan and made it more intelligent - injecting great thought into it, streamlining its efficiency, strengthening its foundational integrity. There was great power and advantage getting all design (and non-design) professionals around one table to hash out open issues. It was a tremendous benefit in the end and great progress was made at rapid speed. The charrette is an accelerated conduit for progress. It should be a mandatory design step for all projects!!
[...work in progress... ...more to come...]