Do I need an architect or SE? Any recommendations?

[SarahG]

Plans are in, we hear mid June if it’s going to be approved or not 🤞🏻

Architect did our plans but it was so slow and painful we don’t want to use him anymore.
 

Can I just go straight to a structural engineer and get them to do the calculations and buildings reg drawings? I’m not sure why we would go to an architect and then get them to get an SE to do the calculations. Seems like paying for two people is potentially unnecessary? Am I missing something? Going to give a few SE’s a call next week but thought I would ask here. Our build is very straightforward, we know what we want, but are not necessarily experts so advice is appreciated but we don’t need hand holding.

Anyone have any recommendations for SE’s that might do this in Surrey area?

[nod]

Definitely need a SE Normally cheaper than an Architect to do the building regs 

[joe90]

I never used an SE, only used an architect to transfer my drawings from paper to CAD. The roof was provided in kit form by a company that did the calcs for that for us.

[CharlieKLP]

Structural engineers don’t always understand building regulations, especially the new ones coming in. 
 

I’d use an architectural technician who can use a structural engineer for the calc parts. If there even are any. 
 

people are going to say ‘oh, architects are expensive…’, then suggest you pay a *structural engineer* to do basic cad work, absolutely mental.  SE’s are only considered cheap because they do a tiny part of the job. They usually charge far more than an architect per hour and are specialists. 
 

speaking generally of course. Everyone has different skills in the real world. 

[Thorfun]

if you're building timber frame then some timber frame companies will do the structural engineering and building reg drawings for you as part of the package, so if you're going that route then might be worth checking.

 

other's on here have used architectural technicians to do the BR drawings with good results too.

 

we used our architects and a structural engineer who worked together well with the timber frame company and civil engineers to get it all planned out ready for construction but our build was quite complicated with a new culverted driveway entrance, basement, timber frame and green roofs! 

[Thorfun]

Just now, CharlieKLP said:

people are going to say ‘oh, architects are expensive…’,

not me. our architects were very reasonably priced and we think they did a great job. the Architect designed the house and then, after planning, the Chartered Architectural Technologist did the BR drawings (although his desk was next to the Architect's so I'm sure there was a lot of discussions between them). 

 

but, I think some Architect's ARE expensive and they give the rest of you guys a bad rep. 😉 

[SarahG]

Ok maybe I need to look up some architectural technicians. We are going brick and block so will have to get the drawings done ourselves. One quote I had from an architect was £900 for the drawings, but the SE they used quoted us between £4.6k-£5.2k excl VAT. Which seemed huge, I assumed the SE was doing the majority of the work, but maybe not.

 

Can anyone recommend any architectural technicians? 

[joe90]

5 minutes ago, SarahG said:

I assumed the SE was doing the majority of the work, but maybe not.

 No (imo), find a local architectural technician and if they think there is any aspects that need an S.E. I am sure they will know one. If the BCO is not happy that will ask for calcs to be done but as I said above I did not need one for my brick and block build! 👍

[Gus Potter]

54 minutes ago, SarahG said:

Plans are in, we hear mid June if it’s going to be approved or not 🤞🏻

Architect did our plans but it was so slow and painful we don’t want to use him anymore.
 

Can I just go straight to a structural engineer and get them to do the calculations and buildings reg drawings? I’m not sure why we would go to an architect and then get them to get an SE to do the calculations. Seems like paying for two people is potentially unnecessary? Am I missing something? Going to give a few SE’s a call next week but thought I would ask here. Our build is very straightforward, we know what we want, but are not necessarily experts so advice is appreciated but we don’t need hand holding.

Anyone have any recommendations for SE’s that might do this in Surrey area?

Hi Sarah

 

There are few SEs that start as SEs but then branch out into the Achitectural design side. Structural Engineering is often described as "The art and science of design" The focus word here is "art"

 

There are few Architect's (Architects practice the art of design primarily, but also the science of design and many other functions too.. it's a long list) that start as Architects but then branch out into structural design. I work / collaborate with one who is spot on in SE terms.. so know of at least one.. they do exist but they are not that keen on doing calcs.

 

If you know what you want then there are a few SE's that will do your building regs drawings and the calcs as a one stop shop.

25 minutes ago, CharlieKLP said:

Structural engineers don’t always understand building regulations, especially the new ones coming in. 
 

I’d use an architectural technician who can use a structural engineer for the calc parts. If there even are any. 
 

people are going to say ‘oh, architects are expensive…’, then suggest you pay a *structural engineer* to do basic cad work, absolutely mental.  SE’s are only considered cheap because they do a tiny part of the job. They usually charge far more than an architect per hour and are specialists. 
 

speaking generally of course. Everyone has different skills in the real world. 

True Charlie not all SE's are that keen or know about the detailed regs say relating to noise transmission etc.. the building regs are wide ranging!

 

But yes everyone has a different skill set.

 

@SarahGkeep searching and you may find someone you hit it off with and can deliver just what you require.

 

 

 

[PeterW]

53 minutes ago, CharlieKLP said:

suggest you pay a *structural engineer* to do basic cad work, absolutely mental.

My SEng is probably 5 times quicker than the architect on CAD … and has all the standard details for connections etc pre-drawn so it’s definitely value for money. 

[Gus Potter]

3 hours ago, PeterW said:

My SEng is probably 5 times quicker than the architect on CAD … and has all the standard details for connections etc pre-drawn so it’s definitely value for money. 

 

4 hours ago, CharlieKLP said:

then suggest you pay a *structural engineer* to do basic cad work, absolutely mental.

 

4 hours ago, CharlieKLP said:

Structural engineers don’t always understand building regulations, especially the new ones coming in. 

Different takes on approach here from Peter and Charlie.

 

BH is about say buying your first house/ flat, doing it up, then..maybe self building or just sitting back and saying I did that once and that suits me,  innovation, the excitement and that deep personal reward you get, feeling of achievement.

 

I think Charlie and Peter to my mind have identified part of the problem. Charlie mentions new SE's coming in not knowing about the building regs in detail, it's a valid point.. on a social level it could be defined as the division of labour, see for example Adam Smith.. The Wealth of Nations for a bit of background.

 

In summary we all have become more specialised in what we do as the population has grown and now we are arguing the toss about a few quid between Architects and SEs etc. We used to draw on paper, now we use a computer.. it's just a tool. I can spend a day, sometimes more on cad just working through a detail that will last for 50 - 100 years more I hope! Before I could go through a wad of paper.

 

Folks on BH.. it's the thinking time that counts not how fast you can move a mouse.

 

@CharlieKLPbut the same can can be applied to young Architect's and other young designers. It's not their fault that they maybe have less intuition about how to realise their designs economically so that they will actually get built.

 

My advise to the folk on BH is this. Rather than look to save everything you can on professional fees find the right fit for you. You need to work to find the right person for you, they are there and they will save you money in the long run. Bear this in mind. A good tradesperson will cost you £250.00 per day at least. Say £1250 a week. A good designer only needs to save you one weeks labour on say an extension and they have washed their face, never mind any material savings.. and here we are splitting hairs on how fast you can draw in CAD or look up the building regs to check something!

 

Don't get hung up on a few hundred quid on design fees and how fast someone may be on cad.

 

The test is this. Can my designer deliver what I want and save me more than I'm paying them any extra in fees compared with just getting a bog standard "off the internet" design.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 27, 2022 by Gus Potter

[CharlieKLP]

Yes I’d agree. I’ve had electricians come in and fix things in 10 mins and charge a lot, you don’t pay them for the time you pay for their skill. 

 

The point of the architect is they have a more general knowledge and can use the right people when you need them. They don’t necessarily do all the work themselves. Theoretically that should save you the money.
 

At building regs stage, what you need is usually a lot of technical drawings that work to regs level and a few beam calculations, then someone to do the application. 
 

So you need a mix of skills there. 

In my experience structural engineer is a highly trained professional and they are expensive per hour. They aren’t great at creating drawings (usually), or even solutions. 
 

I think everyone has standard masonry details, so it’s like, everyone can do it, you just have to figure out what level you need. I just think for a simple project this would be like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut if you use a SE. 
 

The technician is usually the person who actually solves the problems and does all the BR drawings in practice. 

 

That is technically the best way to do it, with an architect to do the overseeing and assigning parts to the team, the problem is when the architect firm overcharges.

 

Practices will probably charge 2-4k for your building regs on a new build, as a guide.

[SarahG]

Interesting discussion, thank you. I’m not looking for someone who is necessarily cheap, we want to pay someone who knows what they are doing and is going to charge us a fair price. I am more than happy to pay good money to get someone good. I just don’t want to pay for someone who isn’t that good or isn’t quite right for us.
 

Ideally I’m looking for someone who has experience of new builds, understands the current building reg requirements and is able to produce good detailed drawings that we can take to a builder for quote and submit for buildings regs too. Whether that be an SE or an architectural technologist, I don’t really mind. It sounds more like I just need to find the right person for us, rather than getting hung up too much on job titles. We would also like someone to come out at each stage during the build to check the build quality, assuming the builder would be ok with that. I think that probably would be an SE. 
 

I think what I need to do is get on the phone and talk to some people and try and find someone who can work with us. This website looks useful, I’ll give a few a call in our area https://architecturaltechnology.com/

[CharlieKLP]

Quote

We would also like someone to come out at each stage during the build to check the build quality, assuming the builder would be ok with that. I think that probably would be an SE. 

no, that would be an architect role.

[Gus Potter]

On 28/05/2022 at 14:29, SarahG said:

Interesting discussion, thank you. I’m not looking for someone who is necessarily cheap, we want to pay someone who knows what they are doing and is going to charge us a fair price.

@SarahGThat is a good place to start. Often if the builder knows that someone is keeping an eye on things for you then this encourages a good standard of workmanship. Also, if you set it up right and say to the builder that you have engaged someone who is fair minded, even handed and impartial then it gives the builder confidence that if they get a bit stuck they can call on your advisor for guidance... feel able to lift the phone and be able to discuss say problems / unforseen issues on site. It's about working as a team.

 

This to some extent this de-risks the job for the builder as if say there are extras they may feel that they will be paid for them if justifiable. It also de-risks it for you too in that the builder will know that any spurious extras will be resisted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SteamyTea]

On 28/05/2022 at 00:49, Gus Potter said:

on a social level it could be defined as the division of labour, see for example Adam Smith.. The Wealth of Nations for a bit of background.

www.ibiblio.org/ml/libri/s/SmithA_WealthNations_p.pdf

 

Should be read by everyone to stop them spouting nonsense.

We would not have voted to leave the EU if Johnson had read it.

[Gus Potter]

@SteamyTea

 

Great link to the book. Ta.

[Adsibob]

It can be helpful for the architect and the SE to have a prior working relationship, as if you want a good design outcome it’s important the SE works with the architect to conceal RSJs as much as possible, without making them cold bridges. Although our SE was painfully slow, we were pleased with the outcome as he managed to conceal some pretty enormous RSJs.

[George]

As a jobbing SE, a lot of builds never need to pass under the nose of a SE. If they are built to building regulations standard arrangements, and the soil is known quantity with a reasonable degree of certainty by the local authority inspector, a SE doesn't add much.

 

But anything that steps outside of the standard will need a design. 

 

As other's have said you're paying for three things really:

• skills/knowledge/experience
• overheads including professional indemnity insurance
• time to do the work 

Just looking at time ignores the first two major costs and investments the SE has made. 

[CharlieKLP]

45 minutes ago, George said:

As a jobbing SE, a lot of builds never need to pass under the nose of a SE. If they are built to building regulations standard arrangements, and the soil is known quantity with a reasonable degree of certainty by the local authority inspector, a SE doesn't add much.

 

But anything that steps outside of the standard will need a design. 

 

As other's have said you're paying for three things really:

• skills/knowledge/experience
• overheads including professional indemnity insurance
• time to do the work 

Just looking at time ignores the first two major costs and investments the SE has made. 

Do you do many fairly simple jobs yourself, like would you take on a job like this? Doing all the drawings and inspections. 
 

 

 

[George]

8 minutes ago, CharlieKLP said:

Do you do many fairly simple jobs yourself, like would you take on a job like this? Doing all the drawings and inspections. 
 

 

 

It depends on the project as to whether it is simple or not! Sometimes things that appear simple I know will be a headache and price accordingly - I also never like to diminish the architectural ambition if at all possible. 

 

I would only do drawings which are suitable for Part A of the Building Regulations and for the builder to know what structural member needs to go where.

 

I would not routinely include information that relates to the other parts of the regs - insulation, acoustics, ventilation, access, even fire I only know in detail for structural fire protection. (I'm experienced in drainage design but I keep that as an extra service.) I also don't do setting out since a lot of the requirements of the building regulations are all about space (widths of corridors, head heights etc) - but of course I make sure any structural members will fit and coordinate as needed.

 

A lot of those building regulations things you don't actually need to be on a drawing or done by a consultant. You could go to manufacturers and get u-values yourself and submit that. But if you want me to do that, and compile the information, I'd have to charge.

 

Regular or pre-planned inspections is something I've never been asked to do on a domestic build - only called out in response to problems. I think I would do it, but it'd have to be ~£100 a visit to make it worth my while. It's also doubling up on the role of the Building Regulations inspector and they have statutory powers whereas I just have a report back to the Client. 

 

Hmmm... so what do I do? I design the structural members size/shape/connections/foundations for anything that can't be read straight from a catalogue or table. Even with a simple span table, I bring the underlying understanding to know whether it's the right choice.  I do also always specify in standard structural products like lintels - but this is a trivial thing to do and is more for completeness.