Architect or Architectural Designer??

[Mike_scotland]

HI,

Has anyone had any experience with a architectural designer or a house designed from a timber frame company rather than an architect?

i feel architects are really expensive but i reckon you get what you pay for, any thoughts?

Thanks

Mike

[Ferdinand]

Peers down Alice’s rabbit hole.

 

Thinks about going to have tea and come back a bit later...

 

(try a few searches, perhaps via a google with +Buildhub in it. There are a lot of threads about this.)

 

To me this is the impossible question. The answer depends 80% on the client, what they want and them knowing their own requirements and criteria.

 

Briefly, an architect should supply inspiration and wow if you need that, provided that you know your own mind well enough to choose one well and be an assertive client, otherwise you may get their vision rather than yours as they have more weight in the debate; it is like a seesaw needing equal balance. 

 

An Architectural Technologist should supply drawings plus a bit more if you choose well, but will not have the same hinterland.

 

An Architectural Designer is not a specific registered thing. It means that somebody who is not a Chartered Architect or Registered Architectural Technologist wants to offer that service. You need to judge them solely on their rep. and portfolio. For the other two the title means something.

 

Architects sometimes get really narked about ADs, because they feel it as a bit close to the bone when they themselves in the UK have had a long training of 7 years .. shorter elsewhere.

 

As to whether they are good value .... all of that is in your own hands and judgement; I do not think I can comment on that in general terms.

 

Ferdinand

 

Edited August 23, 2019 by Ferdinand

[the_r_sole]

.

Edited September 26, 2019 by the_r_sole

[MikeSharp01]

This is a Venn diagram problem where th two circles overlap mostly but there are areas of no overlap. As I see it one area where there is little overlap is the Aesthetic training the Architects get which is not in the architectural technicians curriculum  to anything like the same extent. This means that if you want anything more than a box with windows you probably need an architect if you know exactly what you want then an architectural technician will do it without challenging you to try other, in terms, 'better looking / proportional / composed' designs. On the reverse of the diagram is our experiance that Architects don't do money so probably won't provide a design to a budget unless you are very lucky.

[dpmiller]

we were very lucky- the guy we used trained in NZ where architects have a SE portion to their training. he is adept at both the aesthetic and the buildability.

[Bozza]

I’m currently self building in this scenario.  My AD is very knowledgeable from a technical perspective.  I however have been the one picking up on detail things on the drawings and my AD hasn’t really made any creative suggestions, and has been responsive but not so much creative, so it’s a bit of a functional relationship. My brief / plot has some challenges and basically I’ve designed the house and the AD has done the drawings. If I had my time again I’d have seen if I could get an architect to do a sketch design to then hand over to an AD to draw it etc, but unsure whether they’d do that.  What I’ll never know is had I paid (much) more for an architect whether or not they’d have come up with a better design or not.  Like every profession you get good and bad.  I do think it’s essential that you review an architects work and get a sense of their style / ideas etc before commissioning them.   

 

 

[Mike_scotland]

All good points - i think if we have a good idea of what we want to build a technologist would be good enough for us along as they have a good reputation, thanks for all the input guys!