I want to influence the architectural aesthetics of real estate developments. I have began the CRE-analyst route with owner/investors because I know it all comes down to $$$. Who runs the cost analysis and value engineering of beautiful architecture?
| +48 | Being asked to stay behind and train my replacement | 14 | 1d | |
| +32 | Best CRE brokerage firms | 22 | 11h | |
| +30 | What does REPE actually do? | 11 | 5h | |
| +29 | New Comp Database - Google Form (Now with Data Validation) | 15 | 11h | |
| +24 | Thoughts on joining an early-stage REPE fund | 7 | 5d | |
| +22 | Starting University LP Fund | 5 | 1h | |
| +22 | REPE/Development GPA | 15 | 4h | |
| +21 | Public Homebuilders | 7 | 4d | |
| +17 | MSRE/MSRED with no RE experience; Naive to think I’ll land a job afterwards? | 4 | 1d | |
| +17 | What would your strategy be? | 14 | 4d |
Career Resources
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
you are tttrrrriippin bro! First of all, there are no finance jobs at architectural companies. I have worked with dozens from tiny ones to Gensler-esque ones. You can influence design in a number of ways however. It can be as part of the architectural team which would be a direct influence of course, or it could be indirectly by a construction manager/general contractor too. Ultimately its always the OWNERS decision. They drive design (or should) based on what they are trying to accomplish. As far as cost analysis, thats usually a collaboration with the GC/CM to provide constructibility reviews, pre construction budgeting, market rate unit pricing etc. The architect may have 2 or 3 different specs on a certain system and they may present these with the GC to the Owner. The whole team would analyze performance spec, aesthetic substance and cost impacts of each. Do you want to get on the technical side or are you trying to stay in CRE finance in some way? Honestly, being a developer for you may be the best option. You control the whole thing. But if you want to design and calc out buildings then you need to be in a technical role.
yeah this is spot on. working on "influencing architectural aesthetics" and "cost analysis/VE" is development 101. typical development cycle= architect produces conceptual massing concept > developer prices concept with adequate contingencies for baseline model > architect advances schematic design and tries to increase the design/construction budget by 5000% > developer laughs and works with contractor/architect to scale back design to within budget as SD/DD effort advances
Agreed. All of the architects want to build these crazy looking buildings and they don't care what it costs. All they care about is putting it in their little portfolio to show the next guy they pitch.
The investor really just wants a cheap box that will maximize their return. At the end of the day the architect works for you / you own them.
You need to be thinking what is the cheapest but still good quality building I can build that is functional and that tenants in the market will find acceptable and lease from me. Over designing / over landscaping / spending too much on finishes that don't result in higher rents / building to the top of the market / getting too far in the weeds are all great ways to lose a lot of money.
Just ask Trump how that's worked out for him. Mar a Lago, etc.
How much of an influence are you talking here, OP? And what types of projects interest you?
Currently in Chicago, JBC is developing the new CNA Center which has been so severely value-engineered that it has practically disappeared; just a glass box. But on Wacker Drive and other places, there are many buildings (1N, 111S, Leo Burnett, United Building, Boeing Building) far more detailed, with more setbacks, different materials, and intricate hard/landscaping, which are all a considerable investment compared to glass boxes.
Who is responsible for the attitude taken toward the product?
I don’t think it’s RE-minded to ignore the secondary consequences of aesthetically defining an area. The area (the street, the corridor, the intersection) is another dimension of real estate, and concentrations of beautiful architecture and streetscapes open retail/congregational opportunities if not intrinsic value for the RE. Diluting areas with glass boxes is an epidemic that kills the potential views and character of a city.
As others pointed out, most of your owners/stakeholders will want the best bang for their buck at the end of the day. Sounds like the owners (CEO's are usually the decision makers, but also sometimes a Board of Directors or a Committee of people) of the buildings you mention near the CNA simply had a bigger budget and put more $$ into their office locations. You should see what some of the O&G companies have done in the past 5 years. Look up the new ExxonMobil campus in the Woodlands. It has some phenomenal features, especially the Energy Center building.
Most people agree with your comment that place-making should not be ignored, but very few of the people capable to will spend money to beautify. However, the street, corridor, and intersection are easements controlled by the city and power companies - not any physically adjacent company or land owner. Unless you have a large site you can master-plan, you will be very limited to what you can do in those spaces, and owners don't want to spend dollars improving those spaces when money can be better spent elsewhere in their project.
Sounds like you have some interest in urban design. It's a completely different animal in comparison to creating buildings, and far more challenging to do well the larger an area gets to be IMO. Take a look at Great Streets by Allan B. Jacobs. Probably one of the best books that studies street design and urban design in detail.
In the end, unless you become a starchitect, CEO of a wealthy company planning to make the large capital investment to build new, or just plain filthy rich and can finance your own projects, your influence will be mostly slim.
Nihil vero omnis cumque laboriosam sunt esse. Qui non qui voluptatem sit repudiandae consequatur.
Beatae non perferendis ut soluta. Qui quibusdam esse dolorem et assumenda perspiciatis molestias. Nam quaerat consequatur distinctio velit est libero ipsam. Incidunt quaerat in placeat ab est illo. Nemo modi voluptates error.
Quisquam est fuga ex qui qui cupiditate eos. Et molestias dolores perspiciatis voluptas.
Fugit vero et sed culpa commodi quae magnam. Et a non qui accusantium quia ratione. Voluptatum vitae explicabo mollitia nulla. Tenetur perferendis non necessitatibus quis.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...