Journal

Three Commissions a Year

Three Commissions a Year

We turned down more projects last year than we accepted. This is not a strategy. It is a consequence of how we work — and a commitment we made when we founded the studio, to never take on more than we can do properly.

We turned down more projects last year than we accepted. This is not a strategy. It is a consequence of how we work — and a commitment we made when we founded the studio, to never take on more than we can do properly.

Framed photo of feet in orange shoes on gravel in bright sunlight

The architecture industry runs on volume. Fees are thin, margins are thinner, and the standard response is to take on more projects to compensate. We decided early on that this was not a model we wanted to follow. Not for ethical reasons — for practical ones. More projects means less attention per project. Less attention means worse buildings. Worse buildings are not something we are willing to put our name on.

The Case for Doing Less

There is a version of this argument that sounds precious — the boutique studio that limits its output to preserve its reputation. That is not what we are describing. We are describing a simple operational reality: good architecture takes time, and time is finite.

What three commissions actually means

Three active commissions at any point means that every project has a lead architect who knows it completely — every constraint, every client preference, every decision that has been made and why. When a question arises on site, it is answered by someone who has been involved since the first site visit. Not delegated to a junior, not resolved by someone reading the drawings for the first time.

What Clients Get

When we take on a project, we take it on entirely. The partner who presents the concept is the same person who reviews the construction drawings and walks the site at practical completion.

This is unusual in architecture. It is not unusual in other professions that charge for expertise — law, medicine, finance. We think it should be the standard in architecture too. It is not, which is why we say it explicitly.

The enquiry process

We are selective about the projects we take on — not because we are looking for prestigious commissions, but because we need to believe we can do the work well. A site that does not suit our experience, a budget that does not match the brief, a timeline that does not allow for proper design development — these are reasons to decline, not to negotiate.

The Waiting List

We maintain a short waiting list for clients whose projects align with our work. If the timing is not right for the current year, we will say so directly and give an honest estimate of when we could begin. We would rather lose a commission than start one badly.

Most clients who have worked with us once understand why we work this way. A few have told us it is the thing they valued most about the experience — not the building itself, but the certainty that someone was paying attention throughout.

See It in Practice

Browse our completed residences and restorations

Brick building facade with arched windows and floor cushions in a courtyard
White stone terrace with large boulders and wicker furniture in sunlight
Woman standing in the entrance of a modern house surrounded by wildflowers

Notes

From the Journal

Have a project in mind?

We take on a limited number of new commissions each year

We take on a limited number of new commissions each year

Portrait of a woman with red hair on an orange background

Claire Moreau

Claire Moreau

Project Consultant

Project Consultant

Create a free website with Framer, the website builder loved by startups, designers and agencies.