I guess it's time for me to go beyond a general interest in LA and decide what it is I want to do. What stirred my interest and question was the combination of outdoors work, creative work, nature, environment, and the fact that getting into LA with an engineering/geology background might easier than switching to something else "creative" that didn't involve the science/engineering side of LA. As it turns out, I am really less interested in that part though. So maybe LA is not the degree for me or at least overkill. I have since talked to two local industry professionals which has been another eye opener. It seems, the two work at opposite ends of the spectrum. One designs high-end backyard paradises, deals with planting and design. The other has a workload that consists mostly of landscaping the space around his company's architecture projects, and deals with irrigation issues, city codes, turf grass, and sprinkler systems. The latter doesn't sound nearly as much fun as the former. It sounds too much like engineering. The guy was great, almost a life saver, provided a wealth of information, and yet I came away thinking maybe I am peering down the wrong alley here. Maybe I shouldn't try to pursue LA but continue gardening at home. Anyway, I got a number of leads for additional people to talk to, and I will see what they say. I could see myself working on residential projects and even for some municipal department. 99% of the cities I see are in dire need of landscaping and protecting those small and shrinking green interstices. Maybe my green passion for nature and environment would be better spent somewhere else rather than possibly having to go to work for a company that's "landscaping" urban sprawl. I don't mean to offend anyone. I just think much of urban USA is not a nice place to live. Is LA the field for someone wanting to make a difference here, or should I look into urban planning ? Anyone ? I'm confused.

If you already have an idea of what you want, a design-build firm would be able to answer most questions and, if needed, bring in the required personnel. Sometimes they might do free consultations or estimates. An architect would be expensive, and you could get the job done with less money. I've heard stories of architects designing a house that's 2x budget. I remodeled my house two years ago, and I worked with https://www.boutiquehomeplans.com/the-process. They helped me out with everything, and it turned out looking fantastic. I hope this helped, and good luck with the build!

i am so sorry to hear about your situation...... designing and building things can be a stressful, expensive and time consuming effort. remember the architect, contractor and client have to work together to make sure we build cool stuff….. i assume you are very happy with the design and your contractor has developed a realistic cost estimate and schedule for the project. remember, its really important to keep the architect involved with the process. when the architect is not maintained during the build, often the design intent is not maintained throughout the process and changes are made that compromise the design. as far as gaining permits and the process…… sometimes that is a moving target and can be a mess. here is what you should do: call the super duper lead architect and ask him what you can do to streamline the process. ask if it would be possible for the project architect (who prepared the plans) and you can set up a zoom meeting to discuss. face to face, in a clam way, will go a long way to managing expectations. during that meeting, write down the tasks that need to be completed and an estimated timeline for each item. if this seems like a long timeline, then ask if they have any outside permit processing firm that they can engauge to streamline the process. after you handle the permit issue expectations, call the super duper lead guy again and discuss the process going forward on the project. a) discuss value engineering on the project if that is needed to adjust the cost of the project b) discuss construction administration services that the architect will be providing during the build process. make sure your contractor or whoever is running the project has weekly meetings with you, the architect and the construction superintendent. make sure every meeting has a agenda that is sent out before and a follow up email that shows what was decided and what open items are assigned to whoever is responsible. we do this and it helps move things along. remember the building process can burn up lots of resources very quickly and making decisions, resolving issue in a timely manner is very important. stay inspired ! doron dreksler spire architecture inc www.spirebuilt.com

I guess if you want to really be able to compare apples to apples, you could take the site conditions out of the equation and get a somewhat more level comparison of the cost of an addition for two different lots, assuming you can easily separate those costs for both projects. (This is equally true for new builds--the same house will involve different costs if you put it on a flat graded lot than if you stick it on a hillside.) Even then, you'd need to be sure the two projects you were comparing had similar designs, finishes, construction styles, etc.--those are all things that are going to influence cost per SF too. Really the best/only way to truly compare is to get good plans drawn up with specifications for exactly what you want, and then get lots of written bids that are for the same project on the same lot. There are far too many variables in play otherwise (including not only the site conditions for your particular project, but also how busy contractors are at a given time--you'll get higher bids when they are busy than when they're slow, so you can't compare a project today to a similar project done a year ago). In your case I think you'll be best served by having an architect do your plans (or if you feel like you already know what you want, just pay a drafter to draw up plans for you) and then send it out to local contractors for bids.