We originally planned to import a building from continental Europe. After several discussions with the company I found their system too inflexible for our asymmetrical site, and it would take on the look of a building that had been deposited onto the site as opposed to one that had 'emerged' from it. At the risk of sounding pretentious, I was keen to have the site and the building at ease with each other.

Having dumped the European idea I went in search of an architect. RIBA here I come.
RIBA and their website are very useful resources. 'Find an Architect' is a bit 'dry'. When you click on practices 'more info' button they all appear to have a broadly similar entry, which doesn't help the prospective client differentiate. So here in RIBA's delicatessen of architects instead of having chorizo, a selection of salamis, cartitza, and other proseccos you've got pasteurised homogenised or pasteurised homogenised. What one is looking for is a flavour, a scent, a colour but it's not available here.

In life most of us pick up our favourite toys and ignore the others; well I was seeking the architect whose toy was contemporary, and I wanted an insight into their creative thinking at any meeting. The responses from their website didn't give any inkling. It doesn't make things easier for novices like me who are not part of the cognoscenti familiar with the scene. I have since discovered the Architecture Foundation who appear to be a bit London centric but clearly lean towards contemporary 'rising ' and 'risen' stars in the architectural world.

They have an interesting website which can be found at www.architecturefoundation.org.uk
Having been critical of the RIBA offering (and I can see theyhave a difficult job representing so many members fairly, but there has to be a better way); the Client Services side sent me two letters suggesting about 8 architects who were known to be working in contemporary design. This again was all very 'dry' but helpful.

From this correspondence we found David Grindley - redemption! Why did we choose David over the others? Having first had a telephone conversation with each, I sent them an information pack in advance, which contained a detailed site survey and our brief. When David arrived for the meeting he was one of the few who had considered the site and how things might look. "I've done some drawings that show you some thoughts I had while looking at your brief and the site."

Alternative approaches ranged from suited and booted 'one of our staff will be involved' to 'these things have to be considered, I can't just do a doodle.' The question that one has to ask when faced with these responses is 'how can the client decide on someone if they don't demonstrate some of their abilities and enthusiasm for the brief and the project?' It is very odd. How do they expect the potential client to choose them? 'Competitions' as they are termed, are very useful, but many of us do not wish to go this longer process, and really there should be no need to for a job of our size. A demonstration of thought, enthusiasm and energy by an architect can really be very helpful for a client.