The original house was what I call LCD (least common denominator). A spec house is like fast food. Rather than trying to make what some would consider excellent it is better for them to make something that is the least objectionable, to the most people. This is accomplished by "dumbing down" the "product"; making it bland, but acceptably bland rather than objectionably excellent. This often results in something that is static and unfocused even down to the number of windows and color scheme. "Committees can agree on a lot of things but they are invariably brown or gray." Look at the color scheme for most churches, schools and government facilities. If you want a dynamic project it needs to be left up to one entity (with the client's VERBAL direction and possibly assistance). After you program the project, with the designer, get out of the way and let them do their job. Critique, of course, until they get it to where you want it, but don't push the pencil they are holding. If you're going to do that then design the project yourself. If you don't like the work they have done before, don't commission them for your project. Conversely it is more important that you agree with their design style and method than it is that they have had experience with your specific type of project. If all they do is one type of project they will begin to get redundant and tired. These people were great to work with and we got a great project. I wouldn't normally stain brick, but this stuff was so ugly, and if we left it it would drive the design solution, and not in a desirable direction.
