architect vs. architectural designers

[ETC]

1 hour ago, George said:

An Architectural Technician will be someone who mainly does drafting work - nothing wrong with that and technicians can be the person spot on for a small extension job. Rubbish!!! You need to learn what an AT actually does.

 

An Architectural Technologist is someone who gets a building to meet building regulations, design details and worries about thermal bridges way, waaay too much. They are on a par with an Architect in importance more rubbish!!! but are concerned with making the building function from a technical point of view rather than from a space and design point of view. Close but not correct.

 

At domestic scale an architect or an architectural technologist is equally 'good'. More rubbish. (For large commercial buildings you'd expect to have at least one of each, plus the civil, structural, mechanical and electrical engineers.)

 

 

[George]

It may be a matter of semantics - all I can speak to is my years working in multi-disciplinary practise.

 

The Architects lead the visual and spatial design and the Architectural Technologists led the technical design. The Architectural Technicians do the drafting/modelling work.

 

You could not run any project without all three working together with mutual respect. In my experience working on major projects, the Architectural Technologists are absolutely as vital as the Architects for a successful outcome. Neither could get anything done without the Technicians.  Your experience as an Architect may differ.

 

However, in the context of this thread, for a straight forward domestic job - for example, an extension, I'd trust any of them to do a decent job.

[saveasteading]

I'm a Civil Engineer, but mostly as contractor. I loved working with Architects and other Engineers to optimise a project. To look good, to be brilliant value, but mostly to keep the weather out.

I told them where the money could be saved, without cutting corners, they called me a philistine, then we worked something out.

Please don't criticise any profession so wildly, as there are better and worse in all walks of life.

But you must choose according to their skills. Some Architects are very practical, while some are 3d artists.

You didn't choose Hadid or Gehry if budget was an issue in the slightest.

You didnt choose me if you wanted a temple to yourself / city/ business.

 

My view is generally that my job was to keep people and their goods, safe and dry for the next 50 to 100 years. Add a bit for looks.

 

Budget? Working to a budget is not necessarily the same as getting best value....that is where specialist contractors come in.

[ETC]

13 minutes ago, George said:

It may be a matter of semantics - all I can speak to is my years working in multi-disciplinary practise.

 

The Architects lead the visual and spatial design and the Architectural Technologists led the technical design. The Architectural Technicians do the drafting/modelling work.

 

You could not run any project without all three working together with mutual respect. In my experience working on major projects, the Architectural Technologists are absolutely as vital as the Architects for a successful outcome. Neither could get anything done without the Technicians.  Your experience as an Architect may differ.

 

However, in the context of this thread, for a straight forward domestic job - for example, an extension, I'd trust any of them to do a decent job.

I’ve worked in large and small practices and in my experience the architects and the technicians worked on the detailing and the construction drawings together.

 

I personally have spent a lot of my time preparing construction drawings as well as design drawings and feel strongly that an architect should not solely delegate this work to a technician. Architects should be able to design and should know how a building is built and should not merely fire a pretty picture to a technician to make it work. 

 

I do agree that all design team members have something to contribute but I don’t agree that a building project couldn’t be completed without the technicians. Any architects I have worked with can and will do the construction detailing and drawing as well as if not better than any technician.

[Gus Potter]

1 hour ago, ETC said:

I’m fed up to the back teeth with the stereotypical view of architects as Del Boy and Arfur Daley types who turn up to meet their clients in a sheep-skin coat smoking a cigar in a second hand Jag.

You are quite right. I expand.

 

1 hour ago, ETC said:

By his own admission the SE above brings in an architect for “the flair”. I really despair when design is seen as something that is bolted on.

Firstly an appology.. My choice of wording lacks substance not least. With hind sight the use of the word "flair" .. wrong word to use as it sounds demeaning.. that was not my intent, far from it.

 

1 hour ago, ETC said:

By his own admission the SE above brings in an architect for “the flair”.

Yes I do. But some jobs.. say knocking down an internal wall to create an open plan space are very much my bag.. SE.. not an Architect's as I have enough experience to deliver good design right the way through to completion.. I wear two hats and I have studied hard to be able to do so.. yes Architecturally.. the lines get blurred here.. but if you want to argue the toss I would say I'm just as well qualified to do that type of job as you as it is about the project holistically?

 

Look at the other side of the coin.. you have loads of experience as an Architect.. I bet you can design a house  / structure that will stand up structurally and be safe.. you just need an SE to "stamp" the paper work. I work with Architect's who I would quite happily trust to design my house with no input from me if I was say unwell. The two professions cross fertilise.. why can't an Architect use judgement to design a safe structure?  For thousands of years they have done pretty well at it without SE's

 

@ETC I'm fortunate to be able to work with Architects who are very talented, some are ageging but they are the best folk to work with as we just gell and focus on design rather than having a pissing up the wall competition.. about our titles.. that is good for the Client and we all like to work together.. the Client picks up on this and feels they have a team that is genuine... and that is partly why I'm booked up with work well into next year.

 

For all.. Architects ..one of the reasons is that it takes a minimum of seven years study and hard work plus a lot of luck to even be considered for your Architect's chartership. Architects don't just draw stuff and wear sheepskin coats (although they are.. these coats as my wife tells me are coming back into fashion.. hang on to that coat ETC.. my fatherinlaw has one.. have my eye on it! ) they also know about contract law.. have a deep knowledge of the building, planning, fire regs, legal expertise.. land boundaries  and a whole load of other stuff... long list.

 

@ETC I'm definitley not knocking Architects, As an SE there is mutual respect so again apologise. There are indeed bad Architects, but some truly awful SE's who just don't communicate with their Clients in an reasonable way and just get stuff wrong.

 

To finish. Rather than use the word "flaire" what about "art"..  Our SE profession is often described as an art and science of design.. Architecture is the same just more emphasis on the art?

 

There is no doubt that an Architect can bring something to the table that others do not have... be that design skills.. innovation, sage advice.. and in the round they may save you money, design you a house that you love, can sell on and make a profit..

 

For all and for me you need to find the designer that suits you and that requires a bit of leg work.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 29, 2022 by Gus Potter

[saveasteading]

BUT

I happen to know of at least one Architect school that criticised practical design.  "This is a chance to experiment, design whatever you like, it is up to the Engineers to make it work."

That of course was from a lecturer, who perhaps didn't do well in practise.

 

I know this because I was asked to advise by a student.   I advised that columns should line up through the storeys, and the roof needed drainage....philistine me! I lost the project a few marks.

[SteamyTea]

16 hours ago, Gus Potter said:

For all and for me you need to find the designer that suits you and that requires a bit of leg work.

That is the problem with a relatively small, one off project though.

Not as if the customer can test out ten different people to design the extension or family home. Then get them to build full scale replicas to test out the different design and construction methods. 

And when one is finally chosen, them them they are only going to get the price of the cheapest quote, while not paying the other nine.

 

It is a one off deal, on both sides. So probably best to save some cash by learning to do things yourself.

 

Edited November 29, 2022 by SteamyTea

[Gus Potter]

On 29/11/2022 at 16:54, SteamyTea said:

That is the problem with a relatively small, one off project though.

Not as if the customer can test out ten different people to design the extension or family home. Then get them to build full scale replicas to test out the different design and construction methods. 

And when one is finally chosen, them them they are only going to get the price of the cheapest quote, while not paying the other nine.

 

It is a one off deal, on both sides. So probably best to save some cash by learning to do things yourself.

 

Yes and no.

 

A lot of my work is small domestic projects.. used to do more big ones but every one is a one off and some can be very challenging on the odd occasion technically to bring in on a buildable budget and still look good. Pretty much all of them involve an element of SE work and associated architectural design work.

 

Now I know that there are not that many folk like me who wear both an SE hat and an architectural designers hat but they are there.

 

They way I work it is to tell a Client what I do. Listen to them, ask loads of questions about how they live and what they would like not just now, but what they want to do in the future and how they view their home.. could be an asset.. could be a forever home. When doing so I chuck in ideas and say.. part of the design process and my roll is to identify what you don't like as this narrows the field. Then say.. I'll come up with a few ideas.. some you may like and some you may think are absolutely awful.. just tell me straight up.. that is NOT what we want.. It is a good model and I do ok out of it.

 

It takes a bit of guts to sit in front of a Client and say.. I'm may suggest things you may find horrible.. but this it is ok to do this and your job (the Client) is to say.. Gus that is crap and not for us! Once make your Client feel comfortable that they can just say.. that is not our bag / crap or.. we like concept than you are well on your way. This should be taught to budding Architects! and SE's.

 

@SteamyTea If you put in a bit of legwork to find someone like me in you local area and most importantly are prepared to pay a reasonable fee then it can be a great way to work. It has taken me a long time to get to the stage where I can competently do the SE and architectural design but in the round can also save Clients money as I have a list of builder contacts and so on.

 

Yes you can learn to do it all yourself and it can be a satisfying process. To do it right will often take a bit of time if you are a novice. You can do the BC stuff yourself, planning and so on.. all the answers are on BH. SE..? you may be for example a builder who knows that it will be ok.. but if you come to sell will the buyer believe you?

 

Find someone local.. they are there and often you'll only find them by word of mouth. You may only need them to do a small part but just having someone there who knows a bit can be of great support.

 

Hope this makes some sense?

 

 

 

 

[saveasteading]

42 minutes ago, Gus Potter said:

This should be taught to budding Architects!

I look forward to being rebutted on this, but here are some generlaisation:

Architects are taught presentation and self-belief throughout uni.

That is a great boost in their careers, but perhaps doesn't allow for enough self-reflection.

In time they change, or go different directions, and few with the utter self-belief are involved in modest house design...they just have to be more practical and try to understand budget.

 

Civil Engineers mostly end up in general management, having learnt to juggle options and decisions.

Structural Engineers are more focussed on numbers.

 

There are few who can juggle the disciplines like Gus. I thought I would met many in the industry but only a valuable few.

 

I went to a lecture once by the head of a large architectural practice. His name on the letterhead.

He said that he did concepts and passed it down. They made it work in principle and passed it on.

Eventually the graduate had to make it work and keep the rain out.

He proposed that this was perhaps back to front, but wasn't about to change.

Edited December 7, 2022 by saveasteading

[Gus Potter]

12 hours ago, saveasteading said:

I look forward to being rebutted on this, but here are some generlaisation:

I shall oblige a bit but don't disagree with you .. To touch briefly on the the laws of economics and so on (see for example Ruskin) and the divesion of labour. Over time, the professions and the way we work, the things we are employed to do have become more specialised. Take Structural Engineering.. we have folk that can make highly complex computer models.

 

To give you an example.. at the higher end a good finite element package subsciption will cost you 25k for a year and you only get to run say 5 or 10 full scale models.. that is 2.5 to 5k a pop! Now it takes a long time to learn how to make a model like that and make some sense of the results. You are probably not going to know much about all the other things that need to come together to get something built. Also you need to be able to convince others that your model is roughly approximate to what happens in real life as folks lives are on the line here. But if we are to make progress we can't be stuck in the past. we need these models to deliver efficient design, it's about verification, comparison with other computer models and so on.

 

In summary design is often driven by cost.. to reduce cost we often need to specialise.. make ourselves more efficient but that gives us less time to appreciate and engage in holistic and good design.

 

You can see this on BH all the time..comments like the SE is not responding and so on or the Architect is blanking us.

 

Hopefully the Professional bodies will come to their senses and recognise that while at the moment they think they have invented a new wheel they have actually not. The best Architects, SE's and CE's, Building Surveyors etc have a rounded knowledge and will at some point be schooled again about who pays their wages.. folk on BH for example.. and be taught about the business aspect of being say and Architect and the fact that you ned put put in a bit of elbow greese to make a go of it.

12 hours ago, saveasteading said:

Structural Engineers are more focussed on numbers.

Yes to start with but some of us then become Architectural Engineers.. there are some great examples world wide. When I was at Strathclyde Uni they ran a course called Architetural and Structural Engineering which was recocgnised by the Engineering Council. It was a good course for students that wanted a half way house.. I think they all got jobs at the end of the course.

 

Don't think I have obliged you on refection but hey ho.

[TryC]

 

 Hey All,

 

may I ask if I can use the services from a retired architect ? they are still registered on the architect database, but when I spoke to them they advised they don't have a company but he still does drawings after retiring.

 

 

 

So, I'm not sure if they will have PII or if they're still OK to engage with for an extension of they're no linger officially practicing/working.

 

 

 

Thanks 

[Alan Ambrose]

>>> may I ask if I can use the services from a retired architect ? ... So, I'm not sure if they will have PII

 

For the concept / overall design / planning?

 

Yes, I would and I can't think of much you could sue them for - except maybe not actually doing the work you agreed.

 

For building regs drawings etc?

 

Maybe not - as the damp problem you discover in 3 years time might need legal action. But even then, it would be hard to determine whether it was the drawings or the builder's work. 

 

Realistically, you're unlikely to sue for anything in say the £25-200K range as the legal expenses will run up too fast. And we all know how insurance companies can wriggle.

 

Alan

 

 

[Gus Potter]

On 09/12/2022 at 17:29, TryC said:

 

 Hey All,

 

may I ask if I can use the services from a retired architect ? they are still registered on the architect database, but when I spoke to them they advised they don't have a company but he still does drawings after retiring.

 

 

 

So, I'm not sure if they will have PII or if they're still OK to engage with for an extension of they're no linger officially practicing/working.

 

 

 

Thanks 

Yes some Architects give up their Archictect's registration... RIAS in Scotland as to maintain your registration you have to do CPD and so on which can be quite onerous. You need to keep paying your professional registration fees. The main thing is that once they give up their registration, "retire" the can't call themsleves a Chartered Architect as it is a protected title, I think they may be able to call themselves Chatered Architect "retired" @ETC do you know? However there is no bar to continue working away and insurers are quite happy to keep writing the PI cover. Why would they not.. someone who has that amount of experience is less likely to get it wrong than someone just starting out?

 

The main thing is; if they finally hang up their boots you make sure they have run off PI cover that usually runs for 5 years or you can say.. We will carry the can after a year, or less and just enjoy working with someone who knows a lot.

 

Now often if say an Architect has been working for a practice they will be over the vat threshold, once they wind downand start working solo their turnover drops below the threshold so great for folk wanting an extension say... not vat on the fees to pay.

 

I would encourage you to look carefully at what is on offer.. you are going to get a wealth of experience, sage advice from someone who has seen and done it all for probably a not bad price?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[saveasteading]

40 minutes ago, Gus Potter said:

someone who has seen and done it all for probably a not bad price?

And isn't looking for fame and awards.

[ETC]

30 minutes ago, Gus Potter said:

Yes some Architects give up their Archictect's registration... RIAS in Scotland as to maintain your registration you have to do CPD and so on which can be quite onerous. You need to keep paying your professional registration fees. The main thing is that once they give up their registration, "retire" the can't call themsleves a Chartered Architect as it is a protected title, I think they may be able to call themselves Chatered Architect "retired" @ETC do you know? However there is no bar to continue working away and insurers are quite happy to keep writing the PI cover. Why would they not.. someone who has that amount of experience is less likely to get it wrong than someone just starting out?

 

The main thing is; if they finally hang up their boots you make sure they have run off PI cover that usually runs for 5 years or you can say.. We will carry the can after a year, or less and just enjoy working with someone who knows a lot.

 

Now often if say an Architect has been working for a practice they will be over the vat threshold, once they wind downand start working solo their turnover drops below the threshold so great for folk wanting an extension say... not vat on the fees to pay.

 

I would encourage you to look carefully at what is on offer.. you are going to get a wealth of experience, sage advice from someone who has seen and done it all for probably a not bad price?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Close Gus - but not correct.

 

The Architect’s Registration Board (not the RIBA, RIAS, or the RSUA) are responsible for the protection of the title “architect”. A yearly fee is payable once you qualify. PII is mandatory. CPD will shortly become mandatory. 

 

The RIBA is not responsible for the protection of the title “architect” but in order to call yourself a chartered architect you must join the RIBA and pay the fee. You cannot become a chartered architect in the UK unless you are registered with the ARB and then join the RIBA.

 

If an architect retires from practice he cannot call him or herself an architect unless he or she is still registered with the ARB. If an architect stops practicing he or she would be wise to  maintain what is referred to as “run-off” PII for a number of years. There are a number of chartered categories but I don’t think “retired” is one.

 

Clear as mud?

[saveasteading]

3 minutes ago, ETC said:

Clear as mud?

I'm a CE, and there is a very sensible 'retired' option for about 1/3 annual fee. I have to declare that my annual income is under a certain, quite low, amount.

So it keeps me chartered and in touch, in case of a return to action.

Very civilised I think.

Engineer, and Civil Engineer are not protected terms unfortunately  hence anyone with a van and a shovel.....

I suspect Architects are paying more for the committees that protect the name.

[Gus Potter]

9 minutes ago, ETC said:

Clear as mud?

Hello @ETC

 

Thanks for the clarification. I suspected I had not got it right. SE's need to keep run off cover also. In an ideal world when you retire from say a practice the younger folk take on the "office" and agree to pay it off in installements while taking on the costs of the run off cover.. call it succession planning.

 

I work with some younger Architects and they have been discussing CPD, I thought (wrongly) that you had to do this now.

 

CPD comes in all forms, some is technical but all construction professionals should have an appreciation of what is going on, not just the construction industry but the world in general as this drives informed decisions. That is what makes a true professional.

 

For our SE stuff CPD can come in many different forms. Believe it or not me posting on BH can be counted as a couple of hours over a year.. we say that is pro bono and justify it by saying.. it's "good for the sole" we may also do some charity work and so on.

 

Thanks again for the info and explanation. Now I know!

 

 

 

 

[Gus Potter]

21 minutes ago, saveasteading said:

I'm a CE, and there is a very sensible 'retired' option for about 1/3 annual fee. I have to declare that my annual income is under a certain, quite low, amount.

So it keeps me chartered and in touch, in case of a return to action.

Very civilised I think.

Engineer, and Civil Engineer are not protected terms unfortunately  hence anyone with a van and a shovel.....

I suspect Architects are paying more for the committees that protect the name.

That is indeed civilised.

 

The main thing is that whether you are an Architect, CE or SE you realise that you carry a lot of responsibility. They all can be a great profession but you can often be held responsible for your actions and that is often not commonly recognised in day to day life. There are other job that pay better with less personal responsibility.. banking for example?

 

 

 

[TryC]

On 09/12/2022 at 17:55, Alan Ambrose said:

>>> may I ask if I can use the services from a retired architect ? ... So, I'm not sure if they will have PII

 

For the concept / overall design / planning?

 

Yes, I would and I can't think of much you could sue them for - except maybe not actually doing the work you agreed.

 

For building regs drawings etc?

 

Maybe not - as the damp problem you discover in 3 years time might need legal action. But even then, it would be hard to determine whether it was the drawings or the builder's work. 

 

Realistically, you're unlikely to sue for anything in say the £25-200K range as the legal expenses will run up too fast. And we all know how insurance companies can wriggle.

 

Alan

 

 

Hey All,

 

An update.

 

So the retired architect came to visit recently. 

 

Only thing is that I thought might be odd was that is that when I asked whether the boiler needed to be moved, they said no, it could stay where it is. But believe this wouldn't be the case, as the rear extension would mean that the boiler wall would become an internal wall, so the steam would be released in the extension area. Even I know that is right, I did flag this and they said yes you can move the boiler if you want...tbh, you wouldn't have a boiler vent releasing the steam inside a house right, so I'm not sure why he would say I didn't need to move it in the first place.

 

He doesn't recommend extending more than 3 meters either.

 

And I am confused, can uoy extend out to 3 or 6 meters without planning permission,  I've been fiven conflicting information. 

 

Any advice,appreciated.

[MJNewton]

33 minutes ago, TryC said:

Only thing is that I thought might be odd was that is that when I asked whether the boiler needed to be moved, they said no, it could stay where it is. But believe this wouldn't be the case, as the rear extension would mean that the boiler wall would become an internal wall, so the steam would be released in the extension area. Even I know that is right, I did flag this and they said yes you can move the boiler if you want...tbh, you wouldn't have a boiler vent releasing the steam inside a house right, so I'm not sure why he would say I didn't need to move it in the first place.

 

Hard to comment without further information. Do you have any photos/drawings that might help illustrate what you've got and what you want? This thread has been on quite a journey and we're still missing this really important context.

 

In saying the 'boiler doesn't need to be moved' might he meant literally that, but the flue might need re-routing?

 

Quote

 

He doesn't recommend extending more than 3 meters either.

 

And I am confused, can uoy extend out to 3 or 6 meters without planning permission,  I've been fiven conflicting information. 

 

Any advice,appreciated.

 

Permitted Development allows rear projections of between 3 and 6 metres (for non-detached houses) but they require 'prior approval' which means the neighbours are consulted and various aspects are taken into consideration to determine whether it is permissible or whether full planning permission is required.

 

Did they give a reason for not extending beyond 3m? Try not to be put off by the (potential) need for planning permission if that's the reason - aim to build what you want/need and can afford. Planning permission for an extension is not something to be feared.

Edited December 16, 2022 by MJNewton

[TryC]

On 16/12/2022 at 20:25, MJNewton said:

 

Hard to comment without further information. Do you have any photos/drawings that might help illustrate what you've got and what you want? This thread has been on quite a journey and we're still missing this really important context.

 

In saying the 'boiler doesn't need to be moved' might he meant literally that, but the flue might need re-routing?

 

 

Permitted Development allows rear projections of between 3 and 6 metres (for non-detached houses) but they require 'prior approval' which means the neighbours are consulted and various aspects are taken into consideration to determine whether it is permissible or whether full planning permission is required.

 

Did they give a reason for not extending beyond 3m? Try not to be put off by the (potential) need for planning permission if that's the reason - aim to build what you want/need and can afford. Planning permission for an extension is not something to be feared.

Hi,

 

 

sorry, yes, here are some drawings.

 

 

I think the architect basically suggested not extending beyond 3m because he wants to keep costs down. It's a semi and I ideally would've ligod to go a bit further out than the 3m...and just to clarify I'm not put off by putting in for planning permission . But perhaps, adding on 18sqm is good too. The architect seems to think this is plenty of room, and of course I value his opinion. 

 

 

I'm open for advice in terms of proposed layout please. I know I'm opening myself up to perhaps a varying degree of opinions here,  but would like constructive feedback please.

 

The initial drawing included removing almost all of the rear wall so the extension is flush...not sure if that is the right word.

 

But when I raised concerns about having gym equipment (currently marked gym area) open plan along with the kitchen in the extended area (due to travelling cooking smells, steams ot potentially grease), I asked for that area to be located elsewhere so it had a door (and basically had its own enclosed space). I had thought it would be good to be placed in the lower left hand side behind the wc and room next to the wc, and shared this idea.

 

In the second drawing, the architect suggested leaving the rear wall almost in tact, and still suggested having the gym area in the original part or the house (leaving the original window in place), and that to get to the extended area, to remove only one portion of the rear wall, essentially making the current room which has the boiker into a hallway (where the numbers 1080 appears). The boiler will hopefully be moved into the new extended area, as shown.

 

 

What do people think of this set up? To have essentially a little walkway into the new area? 

 

 

Also, the room where we are thinking of making into a gym/chill room has got concrete floors at the moment. Do I need to get this insulated?

 

Thanks in advance 

Edited January 6, 2023 by TryC

[saveasteading]

Extra area and volume are usually good value £/m3. Or /m2.

Add 10% volume for 3% cost....that sort of range.

Or in reverse.  Reducing volume by 10% only saves 3%.

This is because it is just a bit more of each operation while already there. Sometimes the labour cost doesn't even change and it is only materials.

 

Depends of course on circumstances, and there are some dimensions at which costs jump. 3m is not such a dimension.

If you want bigger then this is the time to ask, or insist.

 

 

[ETC]

12 hours ago, TryC said:

Hi,

 

 

sorry, yes, here are some drawings.

 

 

I think the architect basically suggested not extending beyond 3m because he wants to keep costs down. It's a semi and I ideally would've ligod to go a bit further out than the 3m...and just to clarify I'm not put off by putting in for planning permission . But perhaps, adding on 18sqm is good too. The architect seems to think this is plenty of room, and of course I value his opinion. 

 

 

I'm open for advice in terms of proposed layout please. I know I'm opening myself up to perhaps a varying degree of opinions here,  but would like constructive feedback please.

 

The initial drawing included removing almost all of the rear wall so the extension is flush...not sure if that is the right word.

 

But when I raised concerns about having gym equipment (currently marked gym area) open plan along with the kitchen in the extended area (due to travelling cooking smells, steams ot potentially grease), I asked for that area to be located elsewhere so it had a door (and basically had its own enclosed space). I had thought it would be good to be placed in the lower left hand side behind the wc and room next to the wc, and shared this idea.

 

In the second drawing, the architect suggested leaving the rear wall almost in tact, and still suggested having the gym area in the original part or the house (leaving the original window in place), and that to get to the extended area, to remove only one portion of the rear wall, essentially making the current room which has the boiker into a hallway (where the numbers 1080 appears). The boiler will hopefully be moved into the new extended area, as shown.

 

 

What do people think of this set up? To have essentially a little walkway into the new area? 

 

 

Also, the room where we are thinking of making into a gym/chill room has got concrete floors at the moment. Do I need to get this insulated?

 

Thanks in advance 

Seems a bit complicated. Could be simplified. Too much circulation space.

[Adsibob]

1 hour ago, ETC said:

Seems a bit complicated. Could be simplified. Too much circulation space.

I agree. You do realise there are 8 doors on one floor, yet not that many rooms. Feels like a network of corridors.
 

Can you put the WC under the stairs? Or is there no stairs to a second floor? What are those 5 steps for?

 

I think the presence of the gym complicates things. Have you really thought about what kind of space you need for each of the activities you plan to do in your home and what the priorities should be. For example, couldn’t the gym be in an outhouse? What sort of gym is it? Heavy weights and bench press type thing, yoga retreat or cardio? Or all three? I think there are creative ways to “hide” your gym. For example, I have a classic road bike on an ergo, and because the bike is a thing of beauty, it looks nice in my study. Then I have a tray on wheels that hides under my sofa and in that tray I have elastic therabands of all different tensions, a Matt and a foam roller. Chin up bar in doorway to study, don’t need much else. 

Edited January 7, 2023 by Adsibob

[MikeSharp01]

6 hours ago, Adsibob said:

You do realise there are 8 doors on one floor, yet not that many rooms. Feels like a network of corridors.

I am no architect so please take my thinking with a pinch of salt. It does look a bit 'complicated'. Cannot see why you need the two doors in the corridor to the kitchen, (lounge exit - which would create more functional space in the lounge if removed  & kitchen entrance - which adds nothing other than complexity in my view) - many like open plan living and no doors are a hint at that and would allow a view from the Lounge to the garden.  The kitchen does feel 'pinched' there is no seating / dinning area there so not sure where you intend to put yourselves for eating - unless the run beside the dishwasher is a bar of some sort. So, overall, I think making the extension longer is a big plus.