11
O P I N I O N
Friends or adversaries If you want to achieve great things and have fun in the process, it’s best to foster a collaborative attitude.
R eview and approval processes vary greatly around our country, and two extremes are California and Nevada. I’m from California and practiced there throughout my career. For the past two years, I have been exposed to processes in Nevada.
My experience in California was much different than what I’m experiencing now. Beginning with the discretionary review cycles with planning commissions, architectural review boards, and city councils, not to mention outside agencies such as the Coastal Commission, review and approval often stretched into a multi-year process. Some requirements were so outlandish that we would often abandon a creative and excellent approach for a more mundane solution. I remember, in particular, a second home which I was designing for myself. At the end of an informal review session with a planner in Santa Cruz County, which was notorious for its excruciating approach, the planner complimented me on my most creative solution to site drainage, and then asked me how old I was. At the time, I was 63. She then asked the following, “Did you plan on occupying this house within your lifetime?” Enough said. At least she gave me fair
warning, saving me a long, drawn-out variance process, which she assured me I would lose in the end. On to plan “B.” “Do not accept an adversarial relationship between your design and development team and governing agencies.” The lesson I learned: Do not accept an adversarial relationship between your design and development team and governing agencies. Start from the beginning by explaining your goals for the project, making certain they align with the city’s, and then, demonstrate a collaborative attitude at all times. Always listen carefully to
Ed Friedrichs
See ED FRIEDRICHS, page 12
THE ZWEIG LETTER November 7, 2016, ISSUE 1175
Made with FlippingBook Annual report