Post Planning

[ianfish]

I wonder if others could outline their personal experience of working with an Architect. A basic set of scaled elevation drawings have been produced.

 

We had a delay of a few months due to the BC PO just seemingly dragging his feet, but that's for another time!

 

We engaged an architect to work up our design with the aim of using ISOTEX from day one, an ISOTEX ex rep gave us huge worries but again for another time....six soil surveys before doing anything! for one.

 

After a few minor revisions planning was granted and we thought we would then be able to crack on. it was clear we needed a SE input as we were looking at ICF a raft and RSJ's in the build, rather than go blind we had been encouraged to use an isotex friendly one. It was suggested to us by our Architect, he would have a look for us, a month later we had no communication, to be told today any SE with an ICF background could do. Great! 

 

Fortunately I had begun looking to contact a number of localish SE's to gain their take and input. A recurring question from a few people was did we have more detailed drawings?, could we expect more drawings? we had thought that his input was to get stuff ready for BC. Then no replies for a month til, with a short basic email today has again gave us a bit of a wobble.

 

Should we be having or expecting further drawings beyond the basic scaled elevations? 

 

From past communications we believed this would be an ongoing relationship with the Architect and SE, today suggests otherwise?

[Jilly]

In my case , the architect did the drawings for planning permission (elevations, floor plan, site plans etc) that cost a few £k, the after we got permission, I had Building Control drawings done by an architectural technician (ie build specification, apparently these vary in detail, depending on what you want) and these drawings were sent to the SE. The software is CAD and if the architects appoints the SE and they work together they usually are happy to share them. I chose a different SE and there was one sniffy moment where the architect didn't want to, which annoyed me ...

[nod]

1 hour ago, Jilly said:

In my case , the architect did the drawings for planning permission (elevations, floor plan, site plans etc) that cost a few £k, the after we got permission, I had Building Control drawings done by an architectural technician (ie build specification, apparently these vary in detail, depending on what you want) and these drawings were sent to the SE. The software is CAD and if the architects appoints the SE and they work together they usually are happy to share them. I chose a different SE and there was one sniffy moment where the architect didn't want to, which annoyed me ...

You make a good point regarding the SE I would always get someone independent of the Architecht Giving the SE final say 

[Temp]

4 hours ago, ianfish said:

Should we be having or expecting further drawings beyond the basic scaled elevations? 

 

From past communications we believed this would be an ongoing relationship with the Architect and SE, today suggests otherwise?

 

How much have you agreed the Architect will do... 

 

Just get Planning Permssion?

Building Control Approval?

Construction Drawings (if needed)?

Supervise getting quotes and Builder selection?

Supervise the actual building work or just provide support if needed?

 

Getting him to do the whole lot can cost >10% of the build cost. 

 

 

 

[ianfish]

4 minutes ago, Temp said:

 

How much have you agreed the Architect will do... 

 

Just get Planning Permssion?

Building Control Approval?

Construction Drawings (if needed)?

Supervise getting quotes and Builder selection?

Supervise the actual building work or just provide support if needed?

 

Getting him to do the whole lot can cost >10% of the build cost. 

 

 

 

We believed he was sorting the SE this was six weeks ago. We had waited.

 

Part of the fee agreed was to include BC and from what he said Construction Drawings

 

He is involved/partners with an ICF firm so sort of materials.

 

So we will progress a local SE and move on. The fee was toward 10% of the materials cost of the build

Edited February 26, 2021 by ianfish

[Jilly]

11 hours ago, nod said:

You make a good point regarding the SE I would always get someone independent of the Architecht Giving the SE final say 

I'm not sure it helped that they wouldn't work together properly. I didn't realise it would be a 'thing'. 

[the_r_sole]

I really don't understand how a lot of the English architects being talked about on this site do things, seems like they are only doing (or being asked to do) a small part of the overall process?

We would always tender the structural engineer and the client appoints them directly,  but it seems like the communication of who's doing what is weak in this one?

[SimonD]

We found that all apart from one of the architects proposing for our job only quoted for RIBA stages up to planning. It means you then get hit with a major additional cost once you've got through planning.I think a lot of self-builders are put out by this and thus choose a different route?

 

I think there are advantages if the architect works with the SEas you can get more integrated design as if they're involved independently I think they can focus too much on their own areas without necessarily considering the others.For example, the structural scheme imposes itself too much on the aesthetic or vice versa.

 

I think the best solution is to have an explicit conversation with the architect as to the exact nature of the agreement and ensure it's all in writing.

 

Edited February 26, 2021 by SimonD

[ToughButterCup]

15 hours ago, ianfish said:

...

A recurring question from a few people was did we have more detailed drawings?, could we expect more drawings? 

...

Should we be having or expecting further drawings beyond the basic scaled elevations? From past communications we believed this would be ...

 

Those questions are exactly why we chose to work with our architects: they make it very clear and simple. I feel for you @ianfish : it takes a bit of effort on the part of the architect to be open and direct about their terms of business: but most aren't. I have come to suspect that many don't want to be. 

 

When during our build we faced exactly those questions (detailed drawings? ... more drawings?) I replied that we hadn't paid for them, so we didn't have any.

And why hadn't we? Because   ' .... the builders ignore detailed drawings and do their own thing anyway ...'  (architect)

 

Only one trades person was honest enough to say exactly the same thing : the chippy who did our roof.

"When I see a fookin architect gerout of 'is car pur on sum  workboots an' hi-viz on a scaffold, I'll tek sum notice of wharee sez .... " That was me told then.

Edited February 26, 2021 by ToughButterCup

[newhome]

11 hours ago, ianfish said:

So we will progress a local SE and move on. The fee was toward 10% of the materials cost of the build

Have you paid him that? If so and it was clearly documented that he would provide BC drawings and hasn’t surely you can ask for some sort of refund? 

[Ralph]

26 minutes ago, ToughButterCup said:

"When I see a fookin architect gerout of 'is car pur on sum  workboots an' hi-viz on a scaffold, I'll tek sum notice of wharee sez .... " That was me told then

It's one of the things I like about our architect, he talks to the builders on site, discusses things in detail and actually finds a reasonable solution. 

[SimonD]

1 hour ago, ToughButterCup said:

 

Those questions are exactly why we chose to work with our architects: they make it very clear and simple. I feel for you @ianfish : it takes a bit of effort on the part of the architect to be open and direct about their terms of business: but most aren't. I have come to suspect that many don't want to be. 

 

When during our build we faced exactly those questions (detailed drawings? ... more drawings?) I replied that we hadn't paid for them, so we didn't have any.

And why hadn't we? Because   ' .... the builders ignore detailed drawings and do their own thing anyway ...'  (architect)

 

Only one trades person was honest enough to say exactly the same thing : the chippy who did our roof.

"When I see a fookin architect gerout of 'is car pur on sum  workboots an' hi-viz on a scaffold, I'll tek sum notice of wharee sez .... " That was me told then.

 

Isn't that the unfortunate truth. Beyond the initial design phase, all the meetings we had with our architect ended muddier than they began with rare moments of undertaking to get this done within a specified timeline. I also had to sack the SE our architect wanted to use and refused to pay him a penny.

 

We also got caught between all the builders we spoke to wanting more details and architect saying there's no point as they don't get used anyway. If it's a straightforward house using standard building techniques then I'd argue details are less important. If it's unusual design and/or materials, or you're building to a standard like Passivhaus, then the details and specification are far more important.

 

For me this demonstrates the problems we've got in the construction industry in the UK. Having the poorest quality of building construction in the developed world is in part down to this disconnect and lack of trust between the 'professionals' - e.g. your architects - and the builders, many of them with questionable training, experience and standards and who often think they know better. I grant you that sometimes they do, but to the extent that is accepted in the industry?

 

Anyway, that's got me on my high horse and probably hasn't helped @ianfish

[TonyT]

I would have the architect in charge of all the other designers/lighting engineer/ m&e  engineers  etc otherwise, the excuses start when something happens, maybe cost a bit more for them to manage 

 

We don’t work for you- but direct to the client, is always a firm favourite.

 

just as all trades work for the main contractor and that takes the excuses away, stops the blame apportion game. Unless there’s is clear written demarcation

Edited February 26, 2021 by TonyT

[ToughButterCup]

2 hours ago, the_r_sole said:

....  but it seems like the communication of who's doing what is weak in this one?

 

Mmmm, it takes a good deal of  emotional intelligence and courage to initiate a conversation about strategic communication . Here's a helpful framework ......

[ianfish]

4 hours ago, the_r_sole said:

I really don't understand how a lot of the English architects being talked about on this site do things, seems like they are only doing (or being asked to do) a small part of the overall process?

We would always tender the structural engineer and the client appoints them directly,  but it seems like the communication of who's doing what is weak in this one?

 

Not weak at all.

 

the last conversation was he would source an SE, we assumed someone he had worked with. 

 

Six weeks on he aint fussed who the SE is

[Temp]

 

19 hours ago, ianfish said:

Fortunately I had begun looking to contact a number of localish SE's to gain their take and input. A recurring question from a few people was did we have more detailed drawings?, could we expect more drawings? we had thought that his input was to get stuff ready for BC.

 

Ah Project Management. The worst bit about Project Management is managing people. 

 

"Ready for BC" is a bit vague. Is the Architect tasked with "Obtaining BC Approval" or just "providing drawings for Building Control Approval"?

 

If its the former he should be doing the "Project Management" of this phase. He should be speaking direct to the SE and "managing the SE". In this situation it doesn't matter to you what drawings the SE needs because at the end of the day the Architect has to deliver Building Control Approval and the BCO may require input from an SE as well.  After you put the two in touch you just keep chasing the Architect  eg Ask him when does he think he will be ready to apply for BC Approval?

 

If its the latter then a good Architect would still be proactive in his relationship with the SE. A less good Architect that's busy might expect you to manage the SE. You can find yourself stuck between two obstinate people, one who says he needs drawings and the other who says he doesn't, or similar. 

 

In normal times I have resolved these sort of issues by getting both sides in a room together. I guess now it might have to be a three way zoom call. You can ask the SE what he needs from the Architect in front of the Architect. Then ask the Architect when he thinks he can provide these things to the SE. Record the session, make notes, send a follow up letters to both summarising what was agreed. Later if you have to part ways you have a lot of letters showing he agreed to do xyz and didn't so shouldn't get paid.

 

If you are paying near 10% of the build cost I would expect him to be more proactive than he appears to be from your OP.

[Ralph]

57 minutes ago, Temp said:

If you are paying near 10% of the build cost I would expect him to be more proactive than he appears to be from your OP.

For 10% of the build costs I would be expecting him to be lifting a shovel and lending a hand, but maybe I'm tight.