Let's get away from squash for a minute and back on focus. I started my farm, and have run it for 20 years, and am starting another one now, to sell to restaurants. Only. What does that mean? 1) Know your market. I sell to high-end restaurants. There are 17 Mobil 5-star restaurants in the entire country. 3 of them have served my vegetables. They buy their lamb from 3 farms, lobster from 2 vendors, cheese from farms whose names they know and who have been written about in the New York Times. If you don't read Food Arts or Saveur, you aren't competing in that market, but any good chef in even the smallest city is reading those magazines, and so by definition that is who you are competing with. Delicata squash was 10 years ago. 2) Good restaurants don't care about price. It all goes on the menu. If a person is spending $150 for dinner, per person, it really doesn't make that much difference if your baby green beans are 50 cents a pound more than Farmer Browns', what makes a difference is that they are tastier, smaller, better color, fresher, crisper. Chefs may not know what it takes to grow great produce (many do), but most know what great produce is. In the main, it is the growers who don't understand what makes restaurant-quality produce, and that is why they don't make those sales. Chefs and farmers work on opposite ends of the clock. Good farmers are typically getting up when good chefs are going to bed. When either of them judges the other based on that timetable, both suffer. No chef worth the title is done before the last diner leaves - typically, the most sophisticated diners - those who know what good produce is - come in for dinner after 8:30 pm and leave after midnight - and spend $130 per person or more for that privilege. A good chef will not only be there to say "thank you" and "good night" to them, but will have shucked their heirloom peas and explained the importance of serving Gilfeather turnips. A grower who wants to market to restaurants has to understand this. 4) there are restaurants and there are restaurants. If all you do is grow one thing, you sell wholesale to a chain. If you grow lots of things, you sell, ideally, a few excellent things to a very few excellent restaurants. Otherwise, you spend 3 days a week driving around to many places trying to sell the same damn thing everyone else is trying to sell. If all of your produce is generated by hyperbole from seed catalogs, you're already a year behind - if you are reading food blogs and European gastronomical journals, you might get a jump on the competition. If you are talking to Melissa Kelly or Dan Brown, you might be actually setting trends for the growers who will be reading about you next year - which could be three years too late. This is the age of the internet, and the market for edible flowers in Iowa is only a precursor to the purple Rosemary blossom foam that is selling on Telegraph hill. If you're reading the seed catalogs to decide what to sell, your market is the people who watch the food network, not the chefs who are on it. 6) The restaurants that you want to sell to are the ones that are busy. This economy has meant a major shake-down for the restaurant industry - there are three sectors that are doing well - chains - grow a lot of the same thing. it must be good, consistent, and constant. it doesn't have to be great. the money won't be either good restaurants - grow excellent produce, be reliable and communicate constantly, expect excellence from yourself to not always be affordable, but have a steady income 3 excellent restaurants - arrive at 2:17 with 7.4 kilos of blanched European celery and 13.2 kilos of haricot verts, with stems attached. If you have sea-kale early in the season, or local green-house ripened raspberries in February, after cognac with the chef go directly to the bank to make your deposit... once every 5 weeks. 5) No chef wants to taste your tomatoes at 11 AM. But if you have blue radishes at midnight you might have a good conversation. Don't expect to get an exclusive arrangement if you don't have a good understanding of what they want - don't try to sell arugula when they want agretti, or Charentaise carrots when Nantes are in favor. Selling to restaurants means volume - the 10 pounds of garlic per week you read about earlier - or quality - the best tasting, hardest to find, most beautiful produce they can get. There is really no point in growing onions or carrots or potatoes or corn for restaurants unless you grow hundreds of acres or a half acre of endangered varieties - some huge conglomerate in Iowa (or Argentina or China) can do the bulk stuff cheaper and maybe even better. If you want to sell to restaurants, you have to make a choice about what you want to grow, and how, and you have to have the market to support it. I can sell my produce in Maine in July and August, but I can sell it in Philadelphia year-round, because the winter market in Philly can afford what I grow, and will gladly pay for it, but the Maine market will not - can not. every restaurant market has these same limitations. 6) Most farmers - hell, most people - don't have the budget to afford to pay me what I expect for my produce. But most restaurants have 36% of their clientele coming in for a special occasion, so on any given night it is possible that I can sell my peas (or potatoes or parsnips or persimmons) to someone who will have the chance to taste such perfect produce professionally prepared and proudly presented more than once or twice year - at best - so it better be memorable. That is why they come back, to spend $130 per person for dinner. That is the kind of produce you need to be marketing. Nobody who knows good food is going to drive a half hour to some annoying "dining room" to have a snooty hostess and a dismissive waiter sell them week-old iceberg from California, if they can drive ten minutes more for winter spinach from some teenage server who really believes in biodynamics. You have to be the guy who grows the spinach, and it has to be delicious, and fresh, and clean. That's how you sell to restaurants.

Hi Nutherokie, I feel terrible if my post made you cry. My purpose was to try to start a discussion to provide you with more of a baseline or general idea of what others on this forum have received from their architect and for what price. I'm so sorry if instead it made you feel worse about your situation! I realize the situation with our architect has been exceptionally positive, but on the flip side, the anguish and frustration I've felt working with the contractor we chose has unfortunately dragged down most of the positive feelings I have about the project by working with our fantastic architect! So, if you look on the bright side, now that you have a glimpse of how important it is to hire the right pros on the job, you'll probably not make the same hiring mistakes I made with our contractor and you'll work extra hard to find a contractor who's the right fit. Also, since your architectural contract specifically mentions providing "material selections, cabinetry drawings, interior and exterior detailing" perhaps you can suggest that you schedule a time to get together with him to discuss what you have in mind for these items so that he can finish up his drawings and specs. I would assume that he'll need your input; otherwise, how will he know what type of detail you prefer? Does he have any idea of your tastes and/or budget? Maybe that's an approach that would work - this approach assumes that he understands that this level of detail was included in his contract and needs to be provided in order to put the project out to bid with contractors and, as someone mentioned earlier, he will be able to "save face" for leaving it out in the first place. If his intention/assumption is different, he'll come out at that point and tell you as much, and then you can point to the place in your contract where it mentions these items and you can ask him what his intention was to fulfill that part of the contract. I realize that this can be intimidating and daunting...it's so difficult to work with professionals who often make it clear that they know so much more than we do as homeowners (and obviously they do!) but sometimes their insistence on doing things a certain way and leaving the homeowner feeling like a big dummy while also having to fight such an uphill battle (AND paying for the privilege!) is infuriating. In this case, fortunately, you don't have to listen much to him tell you this is "the way" it's done - you can just tell him that it may be the normal way it's done, but your contract specifies an additional level of detail and you'll be looking forward to receiving that level of detail (of course, after a consultative meeting where he can get a better understanding of your tastes and budget). I don't know how he can dispute the fact that he should provide it when it's in his contract. He may point to the place where "millwork is excluded" but you can cross that bridge if/when you come to it. It seems like you've spent a lot of money and time up to this point, and it would be a shame to throw it all away. I agree with Richard and others who let you know that many times, even after the architect's work is done, the builder/contractor is left figuring out the details, which is usually NOT in the homeowner's best interest. The builder will most likely not have any design background (although, in my experience, many of them have no qualms touting their supposed design talent and skill!), and you are taking a huge risk that your builder, left without specific architectural drawings and specs to follow, will make design errors that will cause you to cringe every time you see them. This is not the way you'll want to live! I second Richard's recommendation to check out Susan Susanka's book, which I love, but if her ideas do not suit your vision or style, there are plenty of other good architecture/design books and resources that are equally as helpful...check out your local library (although maybe you've already done this, especially given that you're a year into this process). Also, I've found it helpful to subscribe to lots of design magazines (I like Dwell, Arch. Digest, Metropolitan Home, Renovation Style, House Beautiful and others) so you get a huge cross-section of styles to look at and can pick and choose from photos of what appeals to you. Maybe you've done this already and if so, it would be great to bring these photos to the meeting w/your architect so he can see what type of trim, cabinetry, etc you were hoping for...if he has a different vision or opposes your design ideas for any reason, he will probably try to steer you in a different direction, but the bottom line is that he should be listening to you and finding out your ideas - if not, you have every right to continue to force the issue! It will be uncomfortable but you need to do it if you want to continue working with this architect (and perhaps you don't - as heartbreaking as it would be, only you can decide if it's best to cut your losses, put on the brakes and start again later with someone else). Good luck and please let us know how it turns out.

Change orders should be in writing and signed by both parties. That's a standard business practice because if you don't document what was said, you end up with the he said/she said hard feelings down the road. WHich is where you are at. I must say that the price he's given you for replacing the floor joists is extremely reasonable. Extremely. And, he's due his 10% markup on any of the changes. That's how he's paid. That's fair. The lighting needs to be referred back to the original contract. Read it to see what's included and what's not. If it's not in the original contract, then it's a change. Sounds dumb, but the original written contract is the bible for the process. If you don't get that 11th commandment in writing in that bible, then it's a change order, even if it was verbally discussed. The $300 demo wall credit sounds fair, if the cost of demoing the wall was the only part of that wall removal that was in the original contract. It didn't include drywall repair, floor repair, moving of electrical? If those costs weren't specifically stated in the contract, then they weren't included in the wall demo and the $300 is a fair price for just removing a wall. Maybe it was worded like that originally because until you DO put a hole in the wall, you can't know what would be in that wall that would need moving and those changes would have been a change order at the time of demo. It's all about communication. A contract is nothing more than a written document about the communication you've had with your contractor and the things that you've agreed on. Some contractors are good at the work they do and not so good at the business side of it. Sounds like you may have one of those. But, the communication issue is a two way street. In the future, you need to be proactive in getting those changes documented as well, for your own protection! Write the date you discussed the item down and email it to him, "Per our 2/14 discussion, you agree to do XX job for YY money and this does include sub jobs ZZ and AAA. If hidden problems occur, I understand that further change orders will ensue." You'll get his attention quick if you put in writing something that he didn't intend to convey to you in your conversation. For now, your best approach would be to call him and have a face to face conversation. Communicate with him that you need further clarification of the charges. It doesn't have to be confrontational. Just a friendly dialogue. "I'm a homeowner, not a contractor, so I'm not sure I understand your bill. Help me figure out what you're charging me for here." And if you do disagree with the charge, say so. "I was under the impression via our conversation back in the first week of December that this was included in the original payment. Why is that now a separate charge?" Allow him to clarify things to you. And, doing so in person will allow you to clarify your own thoughts and...

Kroopy - I don’t think I’m the one taking that phrase “my kids are #1” literally, I think it’s the parents that use that phrase to justify dumping their SO whenever their child snaps their fingers. I don’t think any reasonable person is going to be upset if you have to cancel a date because a child is sick. However, using that line every single time your child has a temper tantrum and doesn’t like that you’re giving someone else and not them your undivided attention 24/7 is wrong. You’re going to raise a child that thinks the world revolves around their every whim and not only does that hurt your relationship with your SO, it’s also harmful for the child as well. What raises a red flag for me, is a person that is always proclaiming their kids are #1. I mean, if you have kids you don't have to remind anyone your kids are important, that goes without saying. I've never had to tell my BF that my kids are #1 or that they come first. In the two years that we've been dating I've only had to cancel a date one time because something came up with my kids, and I never had to justify myself to him. And there's been times when my BF and I had plans and my daughter wanted me to take her somewhere at the same time. I had to explain to her that I already had made plans with my BF and I would take her the next weekend where she wanted to go. It's really all about balance, which I'm sure anyone would agree is reasonable. To unilaterally say my kids come first, all the time, is just not reasonable or realistic and it seems the ones that are always saying that line are really just using that line to make their partner feel guilty for daring to ask that they give a little attention to the adult relationship. It’s just something for the OP to look out for. Like you said, it may apply in this situation, it may not, but the OP should keep in mind what is reasonable and not feel guilty for asking that her BF put her first some of the time as well. This post was edited by Amber3902 on Wed, Aug 21, 13 at 11:17