Expected architects fees?

[SteamyTea]

5 minutes ago, ETC said:

detail needed for a proper set of construction drawings

I think that is the important bit.

 

What often does piss people off is the IP side, that lack of transparency and general poor quality offerings.

But it is the same with a lot of goods and services, price is not a marker of quality.

[Dave Jones]

be honest, 90% is copy and paste. Your not re-inventing the wheel on every legoland box that is cranked out.

 

Value wise no more than twice (to account for overheads) a plumber, brickie other trade.

 

The cream who design the very nice and rare designs get remunerated accordingly.

[flanagaj]

16 hours ago, saveasteading said:

This came up on facebook!

PLANNING OR BUILDING REGS PACKAGE

£126.32

 

Existing & Propose Floor Plans, Elevations, Section, Block Plan & Site Location Plan.

Are the results in 'Chinglish' ?

[ETC]

16 minutes ago, Dave Jones said:

be honest, 90% is copy and paste. Your not re-inventing the wheel on every legoland box that is cranked out.

 

Value wise no more than twice (to account for overheads) a plumber, brickie other trade.

 

The cream who design the very nice and rare designs get remunerated accordingly.

Rubbish.

[Dave Jones]

quite agree most are rubbish and charge like a wounded bull.

[ETC]

3 hours ago, Dave Jones said:

quite agree most are rubbish and charge like a wounded bull.

I give up!

[saveasteading]

3 hours ago, Dave Jones said:

quite agree most are rubbish

I don't think you are agreeing other than with yourself.

Let's be constructive here.

[Mr Punter]

Architect fees can be a bit steep sometimes but I can see there is a fair amount of overhead, especially for ongoing training, bidding, schmoozing, premises, advertising etc.  Lots of non-billable time there.  I don't know many rich architects, but lots of comfortably rich vets, dentists, lawyers, surveyors etc.

[SteamyTea]

Is using an architect a bit like buying a shirt.

If you choose it yourself, go out in it and feel comfortable, maybe even the odd positive remark, you think "I chose well".

If your better half chooses it, you go out and don't feel comfortable, you can blame them.

Now it gets a bit more complicated, you can choose yourself, feel comfortable, but everyone else thinks you are a twerp.  So everyone else is wrong.

Your better half can choose it, you feel comfortable in it, but everyone else think you look a twerp.

That is 4 differences so far.

You choose, feel uncomfortable, but get positive comments, or negative comments, that is 6 differences.

Your better half chooses, you feel uncomfortable, but get positive or negative comments, that is now 8 differences.

I will not go on, except to say, some people look good in some shirts, other look silly.

There are too many permutations to make a real decision.

So it is probably easer to make a wish list of what you really dislike, which you probably know already, then let others, be they professionals or amateurs, suggest ideas.

Professionals will probably have a larger knowledge base of 'products' than amateurs, let them offer up that information. 

[saveasteading]

1 minute ago, SteamyTea said:

Is choosing an architect a bit like buying a shirt?

No.

I started a response then stopped.

Just no.

[SteamyTea]

3 minutes ago, saveasteading said:

No.

I started a response then stopped.

Just no.

You have never seen the shirts I buy, or the ones I have been given as gifts.

[saveasteading]

5 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

You have never seen the shirts I buy, or the ones I have been given as gifts

Why not? It may be relevant to choosing an architect. Many of them wear "look at me,  I am interesting" shirts.  And scarf. And hat.

[AliG]

I think this thread has got off topic.

 

The original question from @flanagajwas how much would they expect to pay an architect.

 

Please can we keep to this topic, not bashing architects. We all have a choice when paying anyone whether it be architects, lawyers, electricians or plumbers. We can decide if we are happy with their charges and pay them or go elsewhere.

 

I think considering the interest in the forum from architects it is unfair for them to be so harshly singled out and bashed.

[ETC]

1 hour ago, AliG said:

I think this thread has got off topic.

 

The original question from @flanagajwas how much would they expect to pay an architect.

 

Please can we keep to this topic, not bashing architects. We all have a choice when paying anyone whether it be architects, lawyers, electricians or plumbers. We can decide if we are happy with their charges and pay them or go elsewhere.

 

I think considering the interest in the forum from architects it is unfair for them to be so harshly singled out and bashed.

What about vets fees?.........................listen to Jeremy Vine about the subject - some people paying in excess of £10k!!!!

[SteamyTea]

14 minutes ago, ETC said:

What about vets fees

Keep fish, if potassium permanganate don't work, flush them down the bog.

Edited September 11, 2023 by SteamyTea

[ToughButterCup]

J M W Turner when asked how long it took for him to produce a painting (forget which one)  - answered with his chronological age (38 years at the time).

 

I suspect that one of the jobs a professional does is make things look easy to people -like me - who wouldn't know where to start. And back their professional judgement up with Public Liability Insurance.

[Dave Jones]

3 hours ago, ETC said:

What about vets fees?.........................listen to Jeremy Vine about the subject - some people paying in excess of £10k!!!!

 

dont get me started on them. almost as bad as estate agents but not quite.

[saveasteading]

5 hours ago, AliG said:

is unfair for them to be so harshly singled out and bashed.

Correct. I wonder if the op is satisfied with the answers.

Obv mist people are saying its over 1,000.

 

I'd venture 3k is typical for a reasonably traditional design where most details are standard, and without PM role.

[twice round the block]

Every one expects to have to pay a reasonable fee providing an architect can manage to drawer up a set of plans that will go through planning the first time round.

The client shouldn't have to pay for versions 2, 3, 4 & 5 because the architect can't do his job properly.

And when he does the detailed drawings for building regulations it would be nice if the rsj shown was actually resting on something at the other end, instead of being supported by a sky hook.

[Kelvin]

On 10/09/2023 at 21:30, ETC said:

According to @Dave Jones you can get a design for £1000 and construction drawings can be done in half a day. Don’t tell anyone but I’ve got this big red button on my laptop that when pushed will spit out a complete set of working drawings in about 10 seconds!

 

I really think some people need to be shown the detail needed for a proper set of construction drawings and the time it takes to do them not to mention the years tracing required to get to that level of competence.

Yep completely agree on the construction drawings. It caught us out.  Where HH are getting it wrong is in this area. They build ‘kit’ houses so they produce a standard construction pack for their various house types. The problem I ran into with the construction drawings was they didn’t match certain elements of my house so when we came to that detail it was either not in the drawings or it was wrong for our build. I spoke to them about this and they admitted that most of the standard houses end up being bespoke but they’re not resourced well enough to detail them properly. I wouldn’t be surprised if they became more strict about how much you can change their standard design. 

[Alan Ambrose]

>>>

Every one expects to have to pay a reasonable fee providing an architect can manage to drawer up a set of plans that will go through planning the first time round.

The client shouldn't have to pay for versions 2, 3, 4 & 5 because the architect can't do his job properly.

<<<

 

I'm not sure I agree with that. You should generally get through planning first time given a reasonable site, with OK road access, within a settlement boundary, not near a 'heritage asset' - with a bog-standard design nearly identical to next door / the nearest house.

 

However not all sites are like that and may have some planning challenges - and the risk is really an attribute of the site and on the owner, not the architect. If you were the original landowner, you may well have specified "minimum risk - just get me my pot of gold."

 

Now the owner / builder may not want 'nearly identical to next door / the nearest house'. They may want to push the planning boundaries a bit in terms of size, position, style etc. Again the added risk will be down to the owner - if they're the ones that have pushed the architect away from the 'safest' design.

 

A good architect will communicate the risk level and ensure the owner understands it and is happy with it and give them the choices up-front.

 

And given that new plans / iterations take work, it's not unreasonable to pay for them.

 

>>> And when he does the detailed drawings for building regulations it would be nice if the rsj shown was actually resting on something at the other end, instead of being supported by a sky hook.

 

I think both architect and customer need to be clear about the architect's detailed design / structural skills. Again, there needs to be some conversation and thought about the how standard the construction is.

 

Bog standard / within the architect's direct experience - the architect should be able to develop workable BC-style plans. Crazy zinc-clad this, carbon-fibre that, aerogel insulated, custom steel design etc etc etc. Clearly the risk is much higher and you'll need either an architect / SE combination that has direct experience of those exact methods or allow extra in the budget for mistakes / investigation / experimentation. It's the owner's / main contractor's job to understand the level of risk, where the key design uncertainties are, and manage and price accordingly.

 

 

I guess what I'm getting at is risk, management and responsibilities - dull but important. It's key to understand and sort those out up-front.

And there will probably always be some unexpected challenges that need to be sorted out tactically during the build.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 12, 2023 by Alan Ambrose

[SteamyTea]

Hogarth said

"Whoever makes a design without knowledge of perspective will be liable to such absurdities as are shown in this frontispiece"

 

 

Edited September 12, 2023 by SteamyTea

[ETC]

2 hours ago, twice round the block said:

Every one expects to have to pay a reasonable fee providing an architect can manage to drawer up a set of plans that will go through planning the first time round. This is NOT the architect's responsibility.

The client shouldn't have to pay for versions 2, 3, 4 & 5 because the architect can't do his job properly. Very cynical view. An architect can never guarantee planning permission and invariably amendments will be required. I do however think that if a fee is agreed to get you through planning then additional work should not be chargable.

And when he does the detailed drawings for building regulations it would be nice if the rsj shown was actually resting on something at the other end, instead of being supported by a sky hook. We architects just love a sky hook!. Not really any excuse for that. In all cases check if your architect is registered with ARB. If he or she isn't and they are purporting to be an architect report them. They are breaking the law!!

[saveasteading]

1 hour ago, Alan Ambrose said:

I think both architect and customer need to be clear about the architect's detailed design / structural skills

Absolutely. As you say, there is a big difference between drawings for planning permission and for construction.

Complaining parties wouldn't be best pleased if they had to pay for full working drawings, if all they wanted was planning permission.

On an uncontroversial site, with an uncontroversial proposal, the building is really just a picture. Of course it should be build-able. but the fee may not be high because not a lot of time is required.

 

Building reg and construction drawings are another matter.

 

It may be a surprise to many, but, with my contractor's hat on, we hardly ever adopt any drawings supplied to us, and prefer to start from scratch. I think this is pretty normal for any contractor with design skills in house. That way we aren't picking up any scale or perspective errors, and we have it on our own preferred design suite.

An Architect providing the next stage can, of course, reuse the planning drawings and add to them, but it may not be the best course of action. Too much or too little? The client's fee will vary according to this, and the procurement method will be important to this decision.

 

Differences in the amount of detail may be appropriate. A traditional construction, being carried out by an experienced main contractor doesn't require as much detail as it would if going to an inexperienced self-builder or a series of unrelated specialist contractors. 

 

On 11/09/2023 at 07:47, Dave Jones said:

charge like a wounded bull.

I don't know what the cost is for a bull's service. It probably depends on which part of the bull is wounded.

It made me smile though, as did rugby commentary last week that x was 'like a one armed matador.'

[saveasteading]

Architects overcharge and are impractical

Engineers overdesign

Builders are all cowboys.

Surveyors get in the way.

Planners are unreasonable.

Building Inspectors are too fussy.

Clients? it's a shame we need them.

 

Don't worry BH is here to help with fair and polite enquiries.