# Who's best to Project Manage a new build?



## Mizuno100 (6 Dec 2009)

New house in Laois. Starting the build in Spring 2010 with a contracter. I have a good set of drawings done up by an architect created before the job was priced. I am now trying to decide who best to Project Manage and oversee the build. The architect has come forward saying she can but as she's based in Galway I am not certain how effective this would be. 


How many site visits would be the norm?
What other professions cover this role?
What I would lose by not using the architect to see the design throught to completion of build?


----------



## threebedsemi (6 Dec 2009)

Hi
You might clarify a few things in order to get the best responses:
1. I understand that you are appointing a contractor to build your house. If by this you mean one contractor with whom you have agreed a tender amount and with whom you are going to enter into a contract, you dont need a project manager as it is up to the contractor (the 'Main Contractor' as he is commonly known) to manage the project. He will have priced thins into his tender, and to appoint another project manager to manage him is a waste of money. In this case your architect would act in the role of 'administering the building contract', which i would think is easily possible.
2. If there is no 'Main Contractor' and you are pricing and appointing each section of work independently (i.e., a groundworks contractor, a blocklayer, a plasterer, etc.) then you will need to appoint someone to get individual prices,  organise jobs of work and keep an eye on the bigger picture. I am of the opinion that while a suitably qualified and experienced civil/structual engineer, arch. tech. or quantity surveyor would be competent to carry out this work, a competent architect would be as well.
3. Speaking from experience, if your architect is not involved in the supervision of the construction, i can almost guarantee you that your building will suffer in terms of detail and finish. If you have gone to the trouble of appointing an architect to design you house, and are happy with the design, i don't think it makes sense not to have them follow through to the end.

If you can clarify the situation regarding contractor(s), you will obtain more precise feedback.


----------



## onq (6 Dec 2009)

I can only concur with threebedsemi.

You need to understand the responsibilities of the various persons involved under the Health and Safety Acts too.

The Self Build FAQ lists several useful publications you should read before you do anything else.

Ensure your architect is competent to issue certificates for payment and Opinions of Compliance, with either their Part III's [usually an MRIAI] or else has a minimum of 10 years experience at all levels including administering contracts and has applied for Registration.

Your architect should confirm in writing that they have PI cover suitable for this level of work.

FWIW

ONQ.

[broken link removed]


----------



## Mizuno100 (7 Dec 2009)

In answer to 3bedsemi, it is 1 main contracter I would contract with. The architect would be in the role of administering the contract and overseeing the build. But could another professional take the architect's drawings and provide the same service in return for a lower fee? I guess in my case the architect travellling from Galway to Laois for inspection visits will cause extra cost passed over to me. By passing on the design to a 3rd party (a local architect, an engineer, a QS) would I run the risk of losing out on execution of the design? What should I expect architect fee to be for the supervision work?    Thanks.


----------



## threebedsemi (7 Dec 2009)

Hi Mizuno100
With regard to the contract, I assume that the Architect proposed to use a standard RIAI contract. These can only be administered by RIAI members, afaik.
Other contracts are possible, however there are two things to bear in mind:
1. The contractor would presumably have priced taking the form of contract into account. If you wish to alter the cpnract type now, he would be entitled to revisit his price. It may in practice not make any difference.
2. The RIAI contracts, while a bit cumbersome at times, have the advantage of having being around for a long time, and every clause has been tested in the courts. Any problems with who-is-responsible-for-what-when is be clear by this stage. I have the feeling (rightly or wrongly) that with most 'diy' drafted contracts if something did go pear-shaped you may end up arguing about what the contract actually means before getting to the bottom of who was to blame. i have had this out on another tread last year, and am not a solicitor, so I may be wrong in this. 

Regarding the on site inspection, a weekly site visit backed up with phone support to the contractor/yourself should be enough for a domestic project, and you should be able to negotiate a fixed fee for this with your architect, while of course letting her know that you are getting other quotes as well.


----------



## Mizuno100 (7 Dec 2009)

Hi threebedsemi, 
thanks for that. 
Would you have a ballpark figure on what the architect fee should be for weekly site visits plus telephone backup?

Also, I have detailed design drawings but not construction drawings. Should I try to separate out the job of producing these from that of doing the site visits given that I would probably still want my original architect to complete that task too.


----------



## LouisCribben (7 Dec 2009)

As regards getting an architect to oversee the build, I've got one question.

Does an architect know enough to project manage and oversee a build ?

I know an architect has expertise in design and layout, but is an architect competetent in all aspects of construction in the same way as a structural engineer would be.

I'm thinking about the nitty gritty daily construction issues during a build. 
Like as a simple example, would an architect know if the builder wasn't applying insulation correctly, or some other construction issues weren't being handled correctly.
Am I correct in saying that an architect is not supposed to be an expert in construction issues ?  I could be talking complete rubbish though.


----------



## threebedsemi (7 Dec 2009)

Hi LouisCribben
An RIAI architect should be competent too oversee all aspects of construction, except structural design, which is a strutural engineers job. To go a step further, a structural engineer is trained in and generally involved in structual design, which is foundations, concrete/steel frames, design of roof tiimbers etc., so to assume that he/she would be more competent to oversee say slating or second-fix carpentry work than an Architect does not follow.
An RIAI architect should be an expert in construction, sadly some are not and give th rest a bad name...

Mizuno100:
i am unwilling to give you an estimate, as i dont know the exact nature of the project, but each site visit would presumably take a day including travel etc... 
Bear in mind however that it is more complicated than just a time charge per day, , as certification of monies to be paid does add up when the architect is paying next years Professional Indemnity Insurance premium etc...
I am unsure if 'detailed drawings' will vary very much from 'construction drawings' in content, it is perhaps a matter of not issuing 'construction' drawings until they are paid for..  

A lot of this has been covered by onq in a recent post regarding building a house, and that thread should be read by readers of this thread for some detailed info on what is involved.


----------



## RKQ (7 Dec 2009)

Get at least three quotes from three local Architectural Technicians, three local Structural Engineers, three local Project Managers & maybe three local Building Surveyors. 

Experienced Project Managers would only be needed in a "direct labour" context, as they would be on site most of the time & would have good contacts in each trade. They usually charge a percentage rate for a full service.

On site experience, health & safety, construction law and building regulation knowledge is *essential*. Try to get referrals from friends / relatives / neighbours / your Solicitor as _experience_ and *reputation* is very important. Ensure your professional Certifier (mortgage Stage payments & Certs of Compliance) has full Professional Indemnity insurance. 

You should be able to get a written qoute from any reputable Certifier, (Arch Tech, Engineer) outlining in detail the scope of his/her involvement.


----------



## LouisCribben (7 Dec 2009)

threebedsemi said:


> Hi LouisCribben
> An RIAI architect should be competent too oversee all aspects of construction, except structural design, which is a strutural engineers job.


 
But isn't structural design a big part of a build...
Is it a case that an architect has no take on issues like foundations, concrete frames ?
Are we saying that if the builders messed up on the something as important as the foundation, or concrete frames, the architect wouldn't know....?

Does that sound like a good reason to get a structural engineer, and not an architect to supervise the build ?


----------



## onq (7 Dec 2009)

Mizuno100 said:


> Hi threebedsemi,
> thanks for that.
> Would you have a ballpark figure on what the architect fee should be for weekly site visits plus telephone backup?



Allow me to jump in here and make a couple of hopefully useful comments.

The break down of fees on jobs can vary from practice to practice and indeed from building type to type within a practice.

Smaller work like a house tends to be more time consuming relative to say an industrial shed.
This is partly the function of the client's need for advice [as opposed to a more experienced commercial client], the possible lesser experience of the contractor [chosen for cost alone] and the lack of repetitive, off the shelf components [no acres of system-build panels on roof and walls].
This translates into more costs to the practice and therefore more fees on a percentage basis.

A bare, non high-tech storage shed might be done for 4-6% Arch's fees depending on the firm, their specialist expertise and whether or not its repeat work for a seasoned client.

A once-off house OTOH for a demanding client who is an unknown quantity could range from 8-20% depending on the architectural quality sought and the amount of variations on site.

Its seldom that you'll get a quotation for only site work from architects as they tend to be on board for the duration. Its more common to see this type of quotation from engineers because they are seldom engaged on domestic scale work until tender stage.



> Also, I have detailed design drawings but not construction drawings. Should I try to separate out the job of producing these from that of doing the site visits given that I would probably still want my original architect to complete that task too.



I know of no architect who will willingly work to another's drawings if this can be avoided - quality tends to suffer
This is partly due to the client, who has just paid out the lion's share of the fees at planning stage, and is now tight with the money.
It would be bad enough following another architect's design drawings with your construction drawings, but very difficult to cover another architect's construction drawings with your site inspections. 
It can be done but it can compromise the Professional Indemnity cover for a start, since where the responsibility might lie for any undiscovered design errors might be hugely confused.
Sometimes this type of situation is unavoidable, where for example the work was incompetently done or certified, but its usually resisted.

Your original architect should produce the construction drawings and undertake limited inspections on site as well as interim certification of monies and the issuing of Opinions of Compliance after the work is deemed practically complete.
That way there is a clear line of responsibility should anything go wrong that can be traced back top the design and errors based on misinterpretation of another's design work - hopefully - can be totally avoided.

Hope this helps.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]


----------



## threebedsemi (7 Dec 2009)

Dear LouisCribben
Structural Design is a vital part of a building, of course. What generally happens is that a structural engineer designs the structure, and calls to site to inspect foundations, roofs etc. before concrete is poured. If he is happy, the work is covered up (i.e. concrete is poured over the steel reinforcement, roof finishes cover up the timbers, etc.) He will certify that his design is in compliance with the relevant building regulations, the contractor will certify that the structural elements were constructed in accordance with the structural engineers designs, and the architects final cert of compliance refers to both of these confirmations. 
so an architect will not (or usually should not) offer advice on structural design, but will work with the engineer to find the best solution to any particular problem with regard to their design.
as i said before, this does not mean that the engineer should inspect the overall project, as it does not follow that they are more qualified that the architect with regard to ensuring compliance with all other part of the building regulations (from workmanship to adequate insulation levels to fire safety to finishes).


----------



## onq (7 Dec 2009)

LouisCribben said:


> But isn't structural design a big part of a build...
> Is it a case that an architect has no take on issues like foundations, concrete frames ?
> Are we saying that if the builders messed up on the something as important as the foundation, or concrete frames, the architect wouldn't know....?
> 
> Does that sound like a good reason to get a structural engineer, and not an architect to supervise the build ?



threebedsemi's reply is a good one LouisCribben, but I'll add some nuances if I may..

Some architects I know take pride in their ability to undertake structural calculations.

The Bolton Street Diploma in Architecture course used to teach structural engineering in the last four years of the five year course, so for simple calculations many architects who have not have forgotten these studies will be competent.

However, an engineer will happily reel off information from his experience that an architect may take several hours of calculation and research to match.

All else being equal, an engineer is the best for structures... assuming you can find one who is interested to do such small works as domestic houses!

Many engineering firms deal with what domestic contractors might term mega-structures - 12M high industrial shed buildings, multi storey office blocks, regional shopping centres, university campuses - in such projects the structural work might be only a fraction of the civil works such as excavations, cutting and filling, internal road networks, hectares of car parking with associated drainage and attenuation tanks, retaining walls, access ramps and so forth.

Not all engineers will therefore take on the relatively small work of a house. I count myself fortunate to know two offices who are competent and will do so.

FWIW

ONQ.


----------



## onq (23 Feb 2010)

[this message was originally a response to another poster but I've edited it simply to refer to give a bare outline of the role of the Architect - its general, non-exhaustive but it gives a reasonable account]

The architect is the Administrator who is empowered by law under the contract to carry out instructions on behalf of the client, who is termed the Employer, with due regard to the rights of the builder, who is termed the Contractor.
The contract must be administrated fairly balancing the rights of both parties.
The architect liaises with the Quantity Surveyor, who monitors the effects of Price Increases, Extras, Costs and Variations and assists the architect in ensuring that the contract is correctly administered.
The architect liaises with the Main Contractor, the Sub-Contractors, the Suppliers, the Structural Engineer, the Mechanical and Electrical Engineer and QS to improve the buildabilityof the project and minimise costs.
The architect liaises with the Contractors and co-ordinates with Design Team to agree the timely production of construction information to ensure that the Contractor can organise correct sequence of trades, services and products to arrive at the required point in the program  and to the correct specification.

Delays may occur.
Costs may increase.
Extras may arise.
Variations may be instructed.
Provision is made to consider all these things under the contract and allow or disallow them.

On smaller scale work project mangers may not be justified in addition to an architect and/or engineer in terms of the overall cost, complexity, workload or budget.
If an architect and/or engineer are not retained to administer the building contract, a project manager may be considered, but this raises matters of competence and certification.
A project manager incurs a fee but claims to "save" this by better organization and buildability, but this assumes that the designers would have failed to address or carry out these tasks.

On larger projects where the burden of producing design information and co-ordinating the design team is significant Project Managers perform a useful co-ordination and oversight function.
However the following limitations may arise; -


 Managers may organise both the design team and contractor but in and of themselves may not be in a position to administrate the building contract
 Managers may undertake costs exercises but may not be not Quantity Surveyors.
 Managers do not normally recommend payments or certify works, monies,  the design of the building or elements or the built work
Unless separately qualified and competent Managers may not lawfully or competently take the place of the architect or engineer.
If a Manager is carrying out tasks 1 to 3 inclusive under an RIAI contract he is acting as an architect, and this exposes him to liability as an architect.
The JCT and ICE Contracts may stipulate the design and/or building professional who are authorised to administer the contract, usually chartered Architects or Engineers.
If the Manager is not an architect or not deemed competent to provide architectural services, he may be subject to review and/or prosecution under the Building Control Act 2007.

Great store is placed in the alleged ability of project managers to bring in projects before time and under budget.
This is not the function of a contract administrator.
The contract is priced to be carried out within a programme and a budget.
While savings may be made by agreement they should not be imposed unilaterally and without discussing consequences.
Both builder's profit and archtiects fees will be impacted by reductions in overall costs

Note that some Project Managers are also qualified architects and engineeers.
Note that other forms of contract may allow persons not architects or engineers to administrate the contract.

My personal experience of Managers has been mixed
I would make sure a builder employed a good contracts manager before I urged a client to take on a Project Manager.
If he did take on a project manager I would negotiate an additional 25% to my fee to pay me to undertake all the additional correspondence and calls I would expect to deal with.

I would welcome a post to this thread from a qualified project manager to balance my comments above.
I would also welcome any correction, amendment or elaboration of these comments by other building professionals - architects, engineers, quantity surveyors or technicians.

Note: for "he" above read he. she, them as appropriate.

ONQ


----------



## Superman (24 Feb 2010)

[Edit: replied to wrong topic]


----------

