Architect - Planning permission awarded bonus

[Moonshine]

I have been speaking to a couple of local architects for my project, and saw the last of my long list today.

 

He seemed pretty engaged and on board with what we wanted, all good to be short listed.

 

The interesting thing was he was going to provide our proposal with two fee options (without prompting), one flat fee independent of planning being awarded, and one fee (presume reduced) with a bonus if planning permission is granted.

 

It is an interesting idea, and i didn't think that architects work on this basis. Obviously i need to see what the two fees come out as, and be careful what terms the bonus is paid on (i.e. not paying for PP for a shed) but could be a approach to reduce the financial risk on a potentially controversial site. 

 

Has anyone had this arrangement with an architect / service provider before, any possible pitfalls and any examples on the price differential?

[Mr Punter]

I have an architect who likes to work this way.  I think the bonus was about 5% on top of the planning stage work.

[newhome]

My brother used an architect for his extension who works in a similar way. My brother only had to pay the cost to print out the drawings and the council fees, and didn't owe another penny unless PP was granted. He used him for a side extension on his house and PP was granted. My brother then asked him to submit a planning application for an extension on the other side of the house that was rather more speculative. PP wasn't granted in that case and he didn't have to pay anything further. I can't comment on whether he would take on new builds, controversial sites etc, or whether he's any good (my brother pretty much knew what he wanted the extension to be) but the business model clearly works for the guy. 

 

[AliMcLeod]

I'd expect my architect to know the local planning rules enough to be confident to come up with a proposal that will get passed. But, it depends on the difference between the two and how much you want to "push" the design beyond the local architectural vernacular.

 

Edited November 23, 2018 by AliMcLeod

[Sjk]

Will this make your architect very conservative?

[Ferdinand]

.

Edited November 23, 2018 by Ferdinand

[the_r_sole]

.

Edited September 26, 2019 by the_r_sole

[Moonshine]

Thanks for all the replies, and i haven't got the quote which will indicate the % uplift of the bonus, but to be clear it would not be a "no planning, no fee" type arrangement.

 

I was thinking that it would work out something like 90% of the fixed fee if planning wasn't approved, and 110% of the fixed fee is planning was granted (10% differential). 

 

I can see the point that going down the bonus arrangement may lead to a more conservative design and not pushing the envelope, but may be dependent on the percentage differential, with the higher the percentage, the more the architect would push for a conformist scheme to gain the permission. 

 

5 hours ago, the_r_sole said:

It's an interesting approach, how much say do you have in the design?

I could design things I know would definitely get planning but it usually wouldn't fit the brief of our clients.

It's not something I've ever thought about doing, I want clients who are fully engaged in the design process and get the building they want out of it, usually most people want something that works easily within the local plan, but occasionally the planning process becomes about justifying what they want either within or as a departure to the local plan. 

The only way I'd be working like that is for a big pay cheque on a difficult site!

 

its a fair point but what should also be factored in is that for is this is not planning for a house for us, but one that we would ultimately sell, (garden plot) and a large part of our brief is to obtain planning and a design that is attractive to potential buyers. So in effect i am not really too concerned about how it looks, but rather being able to get planning for a house on the site, that looks in keeping with the area, and is attractive to potential buyers.

 

I would want to be engaged in the design but be largely influenced by the architect as that is their skill set (or should be) to design an house that responds to the site and is positively received by planning and buyers. However if it was my 'forever house' i would be all over the design and wouldn't really want to compromise too much.

[the_r_sole]

.

Edited September 26, 2019 by the_r_sole

[newhome]

27 minutes ago, the_r_sole said:

 

yeah, makes sense if you are just looking at a generic design, but then why would you want, as a client, to pay a premium for a straight forward planning application for a house you don't care what it's designed like? 

 

Maybe just to secure the PP on the specific plot if it was felt to be 'tricky', and then you might go for something more adventurous later on with a different architect? 

[the_r_sole]

.

Edited September 26, 2019 by the_r_sole

[Moonshine]

On 24/11/2018 at 21:53, the_r_sole said:

If it's a tricky site then i'd suggest the architect would be looking for a big bonus payment, but if it's only a small amount, more likely the architect sees it as an easy way to make a little more money! 

( the only times I've worked on a bonus arrangement was on seriously tricky sites for multiple units and very worthwhile bonus which wouldn't really be achievable on a single unit site)

 

Thanks, i am waiting on his quote so will be able see if its a proposed small / large bonus arrangement.

 

It is a tricky sloping site for possibly two additional dwellings, with planning being rejected in the past for a single dwelling. 

 

The above sounds very very counter intuitive written down, but going for a two house option on the site has some significant merits over the single dwelling scheme which was refused, and is worth exploring further.

[the_r_sole]

.

 

Edited September 26, 2019 by the_r_sole

[Moonshine]

2 minutes ago, the_r_sole said:

just the magic of the planning system!

 

I hope that is the case for my application!