# Planning permission costs



## Mayo1969 (13 Jan 2010)

I want to apply for planning permission for a rather large but relatively straight forward garage in my back garden. I've asked a friend of mine with IAI membership for a quote for a planning application and he's quoted me €1,200 plus vat which seems rather steep unless he's made a mistake and added on an extra nought in which case I think it would be very reasonable.


Any idea what would be a reasonable quote for a straight forward planning application for a 4 walled 50m sq concrete block built, plaster rendered, hip slated roof garage with roller shutter door and two windowas and two skylights in a spacious back garden with the nearest neighbour >200m away?


----------



## Pope John 11 (13 Jan 2010)

I assume his quotation includes planning permission fee, site location map costs, newspaper add costs, printed drawing costs, site location plan etc.

€120 would be too low, & probably barely covers the costs of the above.

€750-€900 perhaps, remember you will still be required to submit all elevations, & perhaps drainage requirements may be sought by Co. Co.


----------



## Pope John 11 (13 Jan 2010)

pjordan said:


> IAI membership


 
Is he an Archaeologist or an Architect?

[broken link removed]


----------



## PaddyBloggit (14 Jan 2010)

Why not get another quote?


----------



## onq (14 Jan 2010)

pjordan said:


> I want to apply for planning permission for a rather large but relatively straight forward garage in my back garden. I've asked a friend of mine with IAI membership for a quote for a planning application and he's quoted me €1,200 plus vat which seems rather steep unless he's made a mistake and added on an extra nought in which case I think it would be very reasonable.
> 
> 
> Any idea what would be a reasonable quote for a straight forward planning application for a 4 walled 50m sq concrete block built, plaster rendered, hip slated roof garage with roller shutter door and two windowas and two skylights in a spacious back garden with the nearest neighbour >200m away?



That's RIAI not IAI if he's an architect registered with Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland.

People don't seem to be aware of the costs of running a practice of any kind, architectural or otherwise, from the annual fees for the RIAI to Professional Indemnity Cover to undertaking Continuous Professional Development Courses - required by law now - just to keep up with the welter of changes to the legislation and stay "current".

Considering the difficulty in even lodging an application that's technically valid these days [and interpretations can vary from county to county], €1,200 is on the light side.

The Planner may want full plans and elevation of the house to judge the design against it and that means that the supposedly "simple" application for a garage will require the same production time as a once off house, with the compilation of required documentation and forms the same regardless.

The fact that some people may not want to pay €1,200 for a planning application is down to "competitive" prices for this kind of work emanating from people who haven't attended a full time 5-year course in a recognised third level institution and gone on to learn the ropes with a member of the Institute, all of which costs money and time.

You are free to go to such creatures of course - at your peril.

Your pain won't stop there BTW, because a large standalone garage has to stand up and you should get an engineer to comment on the structure or don't be surprised if your "friendly neighbourhood builder" hasn't a clue about the effect of wind loading on long exposed walls and wind suction on flat roofs [if you go that route].

One apartment building in South Dublin had its roof blow off twice because in the first instance the builder didn't follow the building regulations for larger roofs and in the second instance he didn't follow the inspecting engineers recommendations regarding fixing in position.

No point paying bottom dollar for professional services and then complaining when the roof falls in, blows off, or lands on your new car, which you' may have paid €40+ for to get you from A to B - all because you did not shell out 10% of the cost of the build on professional services.

You've got to keep all this in mind when you're consideration what constituted reasonable fees.

ONQ.


----------



## DBK100 (14 Jan 2010)

I would think that €1,200 sounds like an appropriate price given the work involved in preparing a full planning application with all required drawings of the existing building etc.

You should get one or two other prices that allow you to compare.

I would suggest to you that you don't need an RIAI Architect for this type of job (I am one). The work you describe could be done professionally and competently by an architectural technician or a small engineer's practice. Make sure that whoever you engage is not working on a 'nixer' basis, - that their work is covered by their professional indemnity insurance.
The engineer can advise you on the structural requirements (something that a good technician can also do for this type of structure).
It is the designer's legal responsibility to design in accordance with the building regulations and the builder's legal responsibility to build in accordance with them.


----------



## RKQ (14 Jan 2010)

Pjordan you should get at least *3 quotes* for local Arch Tech with PI insurance, you'll find things are very competitive, especially for _very straight forward domestic work_. 

As the OP is very clear on what is required, there is unlikely to be any design changes. It sounds like a very straight forward application - detached domestic garage in a rural area, 200m from nearest neighbour. 
IMO €1200 + vat for such simple work is daylight robbery, totally unjustified.


----------



## onq (14 Jan 2010)

RKQ and DBK100, I cannot agree.
Not because an Arch Tech isn't competent to lodge a planning
Its because there is nothing worse than an ugly shed beside a nice dwelling [I'm assuming this is the case - I don't know the site].

Yet the discussion here only confirms my suspicion that this large structure in the landscape will not get the design attention it needs.
There are far too many buildings built in Ireland designed by persons with limited or no design training or ability.
That's not to say some Architectural Technicians cannot design buildings, many can.

But the OP's "large but relatively straight forward garage " description suggests no design options have even been listed, never mind explored.
He's come to the table with a pre-conceived idea of the design and the price, not a good combination to produce good design.

The fact is that if the client isn't willing to pay for it, its simply not going to happen.
If they client doesn't see the need, he's not going to pay the fees.

This is despite the fact that the improved visual amenity and utility of a well designed building will pay dividends in terms of usability and at the eventual sale of the property.
This should include considerations of multiple uses for the building, its attic space, its amenity and comfort while in use and its links with the main house in terms of material, detailing, scale and access.

Never is the old truism more appropriate than on smaller buildings - good design needs good clients.
We should all be more interested upping the game on small works, not just looking on as potential clients race to the bottom of the fee scale and beyond.
That's just not sustainable in this industry at the moment.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]


----------



## Pope John 11 (14 Jan 2010)

DBK100 said:


> The engineer can advise you on the structural requirements (something that a good technician can also do for this type of structure).


 
This is a very unprofessional comment to make. A structural engineer, IEI status (I am one) has the competance to design the foundations & ground floor slab to suit the ground conditions, the masonry to take wind loads, the roof to take snow, live, dead & wind loads, all to current irish/british standards etc. 

In the back of a structural engineers mind all the time is safety for the persons using the building, & if something goes wrong, then he/she the structural engineer is held responsible.

'A good technician' is a term that has been around for years, especially in the architectural field where you see 'a good technician' can do that for you instead of a fully qualified RIAI architect. More often than not this leads to many issues down the road, with the builder saying, 'i put in the foundations in accordance with the drawings', whereby the Client gave the technicians drawings to the builder, assuming they were construction drawings.

'A good technician' could mean an IT technician, CAD technician, engineering technician, architectural technician, electrical technician etc


----------



## DBK100 (14 Jan 2010)

Pope John 11 said:


> This is a very unprofessional comment to make.
> 
> 'A good technician' is a term that has been around for years, especially in the architectural field where you see 'a good technician' can do that for you instead of a fully qualified RIAI architect. More often than not this leads to many issues down the road, with the builder saying, 'i put in the foundations in accordance with the drawings', whereby the Client gave the technicians drawings to the builder, assuming they were construction drawings.
> 
> 'A good technician' could mean an IT technician, CAD technician, engineering technician, architectural technician, electrical technician etc



                 No, it’s not an unprofessional comment.
We are talking about a very, very simple, single-storey garage structure and an *Architectural Technician* of course.
Furthermore, we have been discussing the preparation of a *Planning Application* scheme as opposed to a set of *Construction Drawings*.

Later, when the garage was granted planning permission and the OP required a set of Construction Drawings I would be astounded if a competent and professional technician could not utilize their intimate knowledge of structure and detailing gained from three to four years training in college and subsequent professional experience to put together a very comprehensive set.
Please do read the relevant posts before stating that subsequent comments are "unprofessional" (and consider more moderate adjectives too).


----------



## GL01 (14 Jan 2010)

To the OP:

Do you honestly expect someone to prepare and submit a planning permission for €120?

Do you have any idea of the work that goes into this? 

I am _astounded_ at people claiming that quotes are completely unreasonable when they clearly have no idea what it takes to prepare a planning application for a building, no matter how straightforward.

Here is a non-exhaustive list of what must be undertaken prior to submitting a planning application.

1. survey the property
2. read the development plan for the area
3. read the particular planning requirements for the area
4. draw the site and any buildings on it
5. design the new building, in consultation with any other consultants necessary, (this might incur an additional fee).
6. draw plans, sections, elevations, contiguous elevations, fully labelled dimensioned 
7. prepare a report describing the development
8. fill in the planning application
9. make relevant number of copies of the planning submission and submit

Throught this process your consultant will need to visit the site at least once to take the measured survey, they will need to meet with you initially to discuss requirements, once again to submit a draft and prehaps again to go through the final application. Travel costs need to be taken into account, as do printing costs, the cost of any maps that need to be bought from OSI, along with any overheads the consultnant may have.

Please rethink the idea that €120 would be a reasonable amount to pay for this.


----------



## Pope John 11 (14 Jan 2010)

DBK100, please dont take my words out of context, see below:



DBK100 said:


> We are talking about a very, very simple, single-storey garage structure and an *Architectural Technician* of course.).


 
I agree



DBK100 said:


> Furthermore, we have been discussing the preparation of a *Planning Application* scheme as opposed to a set of *Construction Drawings*.


 
I agree, I never said otherwise
just making the OP aware that an engineer will be required at a later stage. In some cases, like a simple building of this nature, where perhaps no certification is deemed necessary in the opinion of a Client, the Client may assume the planning drawings as Construcn drawings.



DBK100 said:


> Later, when the garage was granted planning permission and the OP required a set of Construction Drawings I would be astounded if a competent and professional technician could not utilize their intimate knowledge of structure and detailing gained from three to four years training in college and subsequent professional experience to put together a very comprehensive set.


 
No,this is where you have to be very careful. A technicians downfall normally would be in the foundation design/not knowing the correct ground conditions.



DBK100 said:


> Please do read the relevant posts before stating that subsequent comments are "unprofessional" (and consider more moderate adjectives too).


 
Note, I have read the other posts & I would view my previous comments as fair. It sends alarm bells through my head when I hear, what I would consider very lax comments


----------



## Pope John 11 (14 Jan 2010)

GL01 said:


> To the OP:
> 
> Do you honestly expect someone to prepare and submit a planning permission for €120?
> 
> ...


 
Well said, GL01
I'll a another one
10. Pre consultation meeting with the Co. Co. planners, which may alter the draft plans.
11. Newspaper adverts
12. Planning permission notices


----------



## onq (14 Jan 2010)

Pope John 11 said:


> Well said, GL01
> I'll a another one
> 10. Pre consultation meeting with the Co. Co. planners, which may alter the draft plans.
> 11. Newspaper adverts
> 12. Planning permission notices



Well said the both of you.

I''l add

13. Health and Safety Review [Designers Duties under H&S Legislation]
14. Structural Review [especially for wide-span or clear span spaces]

ONQ.

[broken link removed]


----------



## DBK100 (14 Jan 2010)

Pope John 11 said:


> A structural engineer, IEI status (I am one) has the competance to design the foundations & ground floor slab to suit the ground conditions, the masonry to take wind loads, the roof to take snow, live, dead & wind loads, all to current irish/british standards etc.



As does a competent & professional Architectural Technician. 
I do not know of one who would not have the sense to ascertain ground conditions if they were taking on responsibility for the job. A competent technician would consult another professional to advise if conditions required. This would be in the client's interest and their own (risk management). Many professional technicians who run their own business manage to perform these functions day-in-day-out.



Pope John 11 said:


> In the back of a structural engineers mind all the time is safety for the persons using the building, & if something goes wrong, then he/she the structural engineer is held responsible.



As is the case with a competent & professional Architectural Technician.
He or she has the exact same motivations to work to the highest standards as the Structural Engineer: Safety, Risk Management, Reputation etc...



Pope John 11 said:


> 'A good technician' is a term that has been around for years, especially in the architectural field where you see 'a good technician' can do that for you instead of a fully qualified RIAI architect. More often than not this leads to many issues down the road, with the builder saying, 'i put in the foundations in accordance with the drawings', whereby the Client gave the technicians drawings to the builder, assuming they were construction drawings.
> 
> 'A good technician' could mean an IT technician, CAD technician, engineering technician, architectural technician, electrical technician etc



P.J.11, your words were not at all taken out of context. 
The comments above are designed to confuse.
In the context of a simple garage the meaning of "A good technician" is clear. 'Good': Of a high standard / competent / professional. 'Technician': Obviously one of the Architectural variety, as any other would make no sense in this discussuion.



Pope John 11 said:


> DBK100, please dont take my words out of context, see below:
> 
> I agree...
> I agree, I never said otherwise...
> No,this is where you have to be very careful. A technicians downfall normally would be in the foundation design/not knowing the correct ground conditions.



As above, a competent technician would know exactly what his responsibilities are and what to do if they do not have the expertise to deal with poor ground conditions. 
You do many, many good technicians a disservice with your comments. An incompetent engineer or architect will cause as many problems as an incompetent technician. I have seen some of the results.
One of the basic skills of any professional is to recognise when they need assistance - and therefore leave no issue unaddressed.



Pope John 11 said:


> Note, I have read the other posts & I would view my previous comments as fair. It sends alarm bells through my head when I hear, what I would consider very lax comments.



P.J.11, Your comments are not fair and in my opinion are unprofessional (I underline the important words you omitted!). 
'A Good Technician' is indeed competent to undertake the described planning application and will most likely do so for a more competitive fee than Architect or Engineer.
'A Good Technician' will seek further advice when he/she determines it necessary.
'A Good Technician' will have the skill to determine when that situation arises.
'A Good Technician' will always act in the client's interest and minimize risk to all.
'A Good Technician' will advise a client and clearly note that planning drawings are not for construction.
'A Good Technician' would advise a client that they should seek further professional advice if he/she is not being retained to prepare construction drawings.



Pope John 11 said:


> A technicians downfall normally would be in the foundation design/not knowing the correct ground conditions.


This generalization is quite incredible and untrue.
The suitability of a construction professional to undertake this garage planning application is not based on whether they are an Architect, Engineer or Technician, *but on whether they are Professional and Competent.*


----------



## onq (14 Jan 2010)

DBK100 said:


> <snip>
> The suitability of a construction professional to undertake this garage planning application is not based on whether they are an Architect, Engineer or Technician, *but on whether they are Professional and Competent.*



DBK100,

<sarcasm>
"Engineers are okay to design shed buildings - sure they do it all the time."
</sarcasm>

Large garages in the landscape need little design input?
Design training and ability don't really come into it then?
Not the sort of admission I would expect from an RIAI man.
I would have thought big sheds are a challenge to design well.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]


----------



## onq (14 Jan 2010)

You know I have to be the devil's advocate here, just to round out this exchange a little.

A guy with a site near us applied for a triple garage recently with a tight entry near the first garage door.
There was no way a car could make it into the third garage door.
All doors were separated by columns and the angle was too acute from the entrance point.

He could have done it in several ways but it made it from elevation to plan to lodgement.
Elevationally acceptable, functionally not workign too well.

You could argue that the third bay was for a motorcycle, but I know this guy is a car buff.
Yes, you guessed it, the application was designed and lodged by an architect [not me].

ONQ.


----------



## Pope John 11 (15 Jan 2010)

DBK100 said:


> I do not know of one who would not have the sense to ascertain ground conditions if they were taking on responsibility for the job.


Wrong on this point DBK100, I have been involved in carrying out repairs in the form of underpinning works to foundations of many small existing dwelling projects where subsidence has been an issue & incorrect ground conditions have been ascertained. In a perfect world your comments would be correct. Unfortunately people take risks all the time.



DBK100 said:


> A competent technician would consult another professional to advise if conditions required..........


I agree with the wording of your text above, its what I would have expected you to say a little bit earlier. But this is totally different to what you previously said, quote below, in my opinion,


DBK100 said:


> The work you describe could be done professionally and competently by an architectural technician or a small engineer's practice.......
> The engineer can advise you on the structural requirements (something that a good technician can also do for this type of structure).


 
Correctt me if I am wrong, but there is no mention of 'another professional' been consulted in your above quote



DBK100 said:


> The suitability of a construction professional to undertake this garage planning application is not based on whether they are an Architect, Engineer or Technician, *but on whether they are Professional and Competent.*


I agree



DBK100 said:


> This generalization is quite incredible and untrue.


 Unfortnately I am speakng from experience in this case.  I ahve come across this on several occasions.

Sorry for the rant OP.

Sorry for the spelling errors if any, my keyboard is on the blink, I think I need 'a good technician' of the IT variety to fx it for me.


----------



## DBK100 (15 Jan 2010)

Pope John 11 said:


> I agree with the wording of your text above, its what I would have expected you to say a little bit earlier. But this is totally different to what you previously said, quote below, in my opinion,
> 
> 
> Correctt me if I am wrong, but there is no mention of 'another professional' been consulted in your above quote



Agreed, and why i elaborated.
I would have expected you P.J.11 to elaborate or add your thoughts to my comment instead of the _"very unprofessional"_ comment. Those are very strong and unwarranted words. I am relatively new to posting here and have learn't that my comments need to be qualified & considered as the 'audience' and their knowledge is not known.


----------



## DBK100 (15 Jan 2010)

onq said:


> DBK100,
> 
> <sarcasm>
> "Engineers are okay to design shed buildings - sure they do it all the time."
> ...



                 ONQ, 
Many large garages, sheds, barns, silos, etc. whether clad with profiled metal, precast concrete or fair-faced block etc... are Exempted Development in our landscape when they have an agricultural use.
Thats a lot of potential for ugly structures with no design input.
We can't control everything.

You say this garage should have quality design input. Maybe in an ideal world, but given the lack of quality design associated with many houses in our landscape I think they should be prioritized!

On a purely practical level, if so many are prepared to forego design input for their actual homes do you really think you will find many garage builders concerned enough to pay a realistic fee for 'high-end garage design'?

DBK100


----------



## RKQ (15 Jan 2010)

onq said:


> Well said the both of you.
> 
> I''l add
> 
> ...


 
A Structural Review for a domestic garage is abit OTT. As is a Pre consultation meeting with the Co. Co. planners, which may alter the draft plans or having to learn or _read the development plan_ for the area. Surely a local professional with PI insurance would be "up to speed" on the Development Plan.

The OP clearly states he / she wants to build a blockwork garage with slated hip roof & rendered walls. No mention of box metal, wide span portal frames or silo's.

Lets not make a mountain out of a mole hill. The OP asked a very simple question and deserves a simple & honest answer. IMO €1200 plus vat is expensive for a detached domestic garage (matching finish of existing dwelling). I don't think the OP is looking for excuses, campaigns or splitting hairs on professionals / names etc.

Its not that I agree or disagree with the posts above, its just that I feel many posts are going off topic and not answering the OP's question.


----------



## Pope John 11 (15 Jan 2010)

DBK100 said:


> Agreed, and why i elaborated.


 Thank you DB100 for this. 

QED


----------



## onq (15 Jan 2010)

RKQ said:


> A Structural Review for a domestic garage is abit OTT.


No its not - anything built in open countryside needs to be reviewed for wind loads, particularly lightweight buildings with no cross walls on exposed sites.
With the increasing windspeeds becoming more likely in these latitudes because of global warming this is foreseeable.

If its foreseeable and nothing is considered and the garage collapses with somone in it - who will be blamed?
The unwise architect who didn't advise his client to retain the services of an engineer to consider wind load.

This is the province of a structural engineer, not a technician or architect.
Laypeople mightn't know these things but you should.


> As is a Pre consultation meeting with the Co. Co. planners, which may alter the draft plans or having to learn or _read the development plan_ for the area. Surely a local professional with PI insurance would be "up to speed" on the Development Plan.


Let's see what your own knowledge of the GDA is like.
This is a particularly well known, even controversial issue.
"What Variation to the Meath County Development Plan affects and undermines the current LAP zoning maps?"


> The OP clearly states he / she wants to build a blockwork garage with slated hip roof & rendered walls. No mention of box metal, wide span portal frames or silo's.


Its the OPS job to state their intent to help formulate the brief.
It is the designers job to flesh out the brief based on what the client says he wants at a point in time.
He should also advise the client on what he needs and outline for him things he might reasonably achieve, within a given brief.
This in turn affects the brief and costing and generates a feedback loop until all matters have been discussed.


> Lets not make a mountain out of a mole hill. The OP asked a very simple question and deserves a simple & honest answer. IMO €1200 plus vat is expensive for a detached domestic garage (matching finish of existing dwelling). I don't think the OP is looking for excuses, campaigns or splitting hairs on professionals / names etc.


The OP had an anexoric view of the architects services, which some posters fleshed out for him
He was advised accordingly, not given excuses.


> Its not that I agree or disagree with the posts above, its just that I feel many posts are going off topic and not answering the OP's question.


Its quite clear that you disagree with some of them RKQ and that is your right and privilege.

I don't think its off topic to inform someone fully, but excessive discussion goign round and round in circles with people who aren't taking your point is pointless.
The only reason I am responding to this is that you offered advice in relation to the 14 points posted previous  which seemed to me to be short-sighted and incorrect.
Too many problems on sites and in contractual disputes occur because of the parties not understanding each other or not being in proper accord even when they do think they understand one another.
Getting the OP to think a little deeper about what he could do with a large garage is no great hardship for anyone reading or posting here.

I fail to see any benefit in giving the OP one-line responses on fee issues.

We're designers, and we carry a lot of responsibility.

We're not shed builders.

ONQ.


----------



## Shawady (15 Jan 2010)

pjordan said:


> I want to apply for planning permission for a rather large but relatively straight forward garage in my back garden. I've asked a friend of mine with IAI membership for a quote for a planning application and he's quoted me €1,200 plus vat which seems rather steep unless he's made a mistake and added on an extra nought in which case I think it would be very reasonable.
> 
> 
> Any idea what would be a reasonable quote for a straight forward planning application for a 4 walled 50m sq concrete block built, plaster rendered, hip slated roof garage with roller shutter door and two windowas and two skylights in a spacious back garden with the nearest neighbour >200m away?


 
I have an application for planning currently lodged. We are converting a garage to the side of our house and building above it. Our architect charged us €500 for the site survey and €1250 for planning application. He also strongly recommended the services of a structural engineer which he reckons will set us back approx €1200.


----------



## Pope John 11 (15 Jan 2010)

onq said:


> No its not - anything built in open countryside needs to be reviewed for wind loads, particularly lightweight buildings with no cross walls on exposed sites.
> With the increasing windspeeds becoming more likely in these latitudes because of global warming this is foreseeable.
> 
> If its foreseeable and nothing is considered and the garage collapses with somone in it - who will be blamed?
> ...


 
My original concerns, thanks for reiterting them. Well done ONQ.

Typical sizes, engineer notes, with assumptions etc, as below
OP garage = 50sqm = 7.1m square building (it could be 10x5m, lets assume the latter)
Assuming a 2.4m ht to eaves level
Assuming a 30d degree roof pitch
Height of wall from ground floor to apex level = 4.45m
Wall construction 215 on flat, 100/100/100 construction, 215/100 construction - Unknown
Longest length of wall 7.1m
Garage ope size 2.5 x 2.1m height - lintel head required
Window ope sizes - not specified - lintel heads required
Roof construction - truss, collar tie - not specified
Soil invetigations, foundation & ground floor - Unknown
Drainage - Unknown

Structural input is required

Its a question of when the OP wants the input from an Engineer



Shawady said:


> Our architect charged us €500 for the site survey and €1250 for planning application. He also strongly recommended the services of a structural engineer which he reckons will set us back approx €1200.


 That one be about right, assuming outline of main house included as well


----------



## onq (15 Jan 2010)

Shawady said:


> I have an application for planning currently lodged. We are converting a garage to the side of our house and building above it. Our architect charged us €500 for the site survey and €1250 for planning application. He also strongly recommended the services of a structural engineer which he reckons will set us back approx €1200.



That sounds about right considering the current economic climate.

Thanks for posting the information Shawady.

ONQ.


----------



## onq (15 Jan 2010)

Pope John 11 said:


> My original concerns, thanks for reiterting them. Well done ONQ.
> <snip>


<bows>

You'revery welcome Pope John 11.

The current situation with the Building Control Act 2007 relates solely to the use of the title "architect".
It doesn't absolve people who may be acting as an architect, regardless of what they call themselves, or from the responsibility they take on.
Any court more than likely will still apply the standard that if you hold yourself out to be proving services commensurate with an architect, you are acting as an architect and you are liable in law as an architect.

Saying "I have Professional Indemnity Insurance Cover" may be great comfort to the layperson.
But what you must have, if you acting as an architect, is a professional, competent and rounded approach to the services you provide.
This includes advising your client in writing on what he needs to do, up to the point of confirming you won't be in a position to certify if he doesn't do a certain thing.
[Or that you will only be in a position to issue a qualified cert if he fails to do that thing]

This applies in the present case to issuing Opinions of Compliance with Planning Permission and Building Regulations on the finished garage without an Engineer's Cert.
People who concentrate on getting permissions done for low cost at the start may sometimes forget that the job isn't finished until the paperwork is done.



FWIW

ONQ.


----------



## RKQ (15 Jan 2010)

onq said:


> Its quite clear that you disagree with some of them RKQ and that is your right and privilege.
> 
> We're designers, and we carry a lot of responsibility.
> 
> We're not shed builders.


 
ONQ please do not misquote me or try to twist my words. 
When I say "Its not that I agree *or disagree* with the posts above*",* then I mean exactly that. 
I have not misquoted you or made negative unfounded assertions. 

When did this thread turn into a GDA quiz?
I am familiar with the "job" of a client in formulating a brief. I am fully aware of my professional responsibilities.

The OP asked a simple question and deserves an answer, not a list of ifs and buts. I am entitled to give my opinion, as are all who post to this site.
The OP did not mention a "shed", so I've no idea why you constantly refer to sheds.

There is not enough information submitted by the OP to assertain whether there are internal cross walls in the garage or if full services are required. One can assume surface water will go to a soakpit, on a rural site. But references to Meath Development plan is not relevant to the OP, in Mayo.

I agree that going round and round in circles with people who aren't taking your point is pointless. I don't see the point in "quoting" each other word for word, as I believe this looks argumentative and is very unhelpful and confusing to the OP and the general public.

The OP should get 3 quotes for a _Planning application_ from local professionals with full PI insurance and good professional reputations. These professional quotes can be compared and the OP can decide on the level of service required.

Let the OP decide if €1200 plus vat is expensive for a planning application. 
Estimated quotes for a Structural Review, Tender Documents, Certification etc can be discussed prior to lodging the application but are *not relevant* until / if Planning Permission is granted.


----------



## Mayo1969 (16 Jan 2010)

Thank y'all for your replies, some of which I have already addressed in boards.ie but I equally appreciate many of the points made here however as in my other reply I would also question the stance of some of the posters, whose replies smack of a degree of smugness and superiority of their opinion of their profession that probably serves to put off rather than endear or earn the trust of potential clients.

Whilst it may work to bombard some innocents with technical jargon and lists that are meant more than anything else to project your alleged scale of command of your profession and to make your client feel like a total helpless illiterate fool, it takes considerably more than that to justify to me that someone's professional input is worth a fee of €1200 plus VAT. As I've said elsewhere, I have actually since gone and discussed the quote in detail with my friend and the discussion has shed considerably more light on it as well as a very frank and genuine suggestion from him that I should indeed shop around.

But to specifically address some of the issues raised:



GL01 said:


> To the OP:
> 
> Do you honestly expect someone to prepare and submit a planning permission for €120? NO I don't, certainly not, He was "doing me a favour" which I would have expected to be VERY compteitive relative to his normal charges so that for a normal professional fee of say €400, then a relative quote from him for €120 would have been very generous
> 
> ...



I suppose, as some of the other posters, have rightly pointed out, and perhaps as my posting here may reflect, it does come down to the perceived value I put on the professional services of the architectural profession. Unfortunately the experience of witnessing some of the developments  that have gone on in Mayo during the boom times, as elsewhere in the country, have done little to cover the profession in glory or integrity with little in evidence of any form of architectual merit so that on that basis, it becomes something of a vicious circle, when it comes to myself making an application for for a purely functional building, having seen what the profession has produced in the way of residental and commercial buildings both urban and rural in this county, I'm compelled to think, sure if I can get away with pure functionality like the majority, why do I need to worry about character or architectural merit at all. I just want the basics of what I need to get planning permission, whatever that lowest common denominator is this week or month.

I'm also somewhat reminded in this thread of the relationships between nurses and doctors or consultants in hospitals, whereby it would seem proven that nurses do much of the base diagnosis and treatment of patients in most of our hospital wards and the consultants or doctors often only involve themselves to justify their consultancy fees or cover their arses and in doing so also mainting their air or superiority both over their patients and the suborbinate nursing staff. Unfortuantely a good deal of what I see in this thread would seem to indicate that some in the architectural profession breathe the same rarefied air. If you want my business can I suggest talking to me rather than down to me and my likes. If you earn my respect I'll gladly pay you for it.


----------



## onq (16 Jan 2010)

My apologies in advance to the mods who may consider this a rant and wish to move or delete it but I think pjordan has made some outrageous comments which deserve a response.



pjordan said:


> Thank y'all for your replies, some of which I have already addressed in boards.ie but I equally appreciate many of the points made here however as in my other reply I would also question the stance of some of the posters, whose replies smack of a degree of smugness and superiority of their opinion of their profession that probably serves to put off rather than endear or earn the trust of potential clients.


I think we're getting down to bedrock now, having seen your min-rant against the professionals over on boards.ie
Did you come here to actually seek advice or just to diss a firm who gave you a reasonable quotation on fees?


> Whilst it may work to bombard some innocents with technical jargon and lists that are meant more than anything else to project your alleged scale of command of your profession and to make your client feel like a total helpless illiterate fool, it takes considerably more than that to justify to me that someone's professional input is worth a fee of €1200 plus VAT.


Translation:
_"I don't understand what it is you do for the money so I'm not going to pay."_


> As I've said elsewhere, I have actually since gone and discussed the quote in detail with my friend and the discussion has shed considerably more light on it as well as a very frank and genuine suggestion from him that I should indeed shop around.


Translation:
_"I've wasted someone else's time in the real world and he politely indicated he wasn't dropping his fees and wasn't chasing the work."_


> But to specifically address some of the issues raised:
> 
> I suppose, as some of the other posters, have rightly pointed out, and perhaps as my posting here may reflect, it does come down to the perceived value I put on the professional services of the architectural profession. Unfortunately the experience of witnessing some of the developments  that have gone on in Mayo during the boom times, as elsewhere in the country, have done little to cover the profession in glory or integrity with little in evidence of any form of architectual merit so that on that basis, it becomes something of a vicious circle, when it comes to myself making an application for for a purely functional building, having seen what the profession has produced in the way of residental and commercial buildings both urban and rural in this county, I'm compelled to think, sure if I can get away with pure functionality like the majority, why do I need to worry about character or architectural merit at all. I just want the basics of what I need to get planning permission, whatever that lowest common denominator is this week or month.


Translation:
_"I have no clue who produced the rubbish that surrounds me in Mayo but I'm going to blame the Architects because they're to blame for everything anyway, right?"_

Some of the derivitive [as opposed to traditional] designs built in the Irish countryside over the past four decades have suffered by NOT being designed by architects.
It seemed that every guy who could draw the occassional straight line put up a plate and named himself an architect and raided the bungalow bliss catalogue.
Nods and winks from councillors towards Planner Officers dominated by engineers employed as County Managers meant design standards were not applied.
All they had to was make their drawing look marginally better than the self-build on the next site and they got permission.

Where the Planning Officers were allowed do their jobs they betrayed a design ethos more suited to supporting the Tourist Industry than setting standards for good traditional or modern design in Ireland.
We ended up with thatch-and/or-slate roof tigheens strealed along main roads in ribbon development instead of community- based clusters with defined edges fostering a sense of community.

Do some checking - you're surrounded by houses which were "designed" by unqualified people, draughtsmen or self-builders, not architects.
Even where an architect was occassionally involved, the design was usually strangulated by planning restrictions on form and materials.
In such a scenario, architects who wanted to design quality buildings went into the Commercial or Public Sectors, abandoning housing.

Nowadays standards of design are rising all the time and partly due to this and the requirements of the Building Control Act 2007, people who falsely say they are architects can be prosecuted.
Of course, any potential client only had to ask where the diploma or degree Certificate was in the office to satisfy themselves that person they were dealign with was a qualified professional.
However many clients in the eighties and nineties in rural areas were like what you appear to be: chasing a price, not looking for quality design - they never even raised the question.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - you get what you pay for.
You're surrounded by what they paid for.



> I'm also somewhat reminded in this thread of the relationships between nurses and doctors or consultants in hospitals, whereby it would seem proven that nurses do much of the base diagnosis and treatment of patients in most of our hospital wards and the consultants or doctors often only involve themselves to justify their consultancy fees or cover their arses and in doing so also mainting their air or superiority both over their patients and the suborbinate nursing staff.


Translation:
_"I have no clue about the medical profession either, and I might as well rant about them here even though its patently off-topic"
_


> Unfortuantely a good deal of what I see in this thread would seem to indicate that some in the architectural profession breathe the same rarefied air.
> If you want my business can I suggest talking to me rather than down to me and my likes. If you earn my respect I'll gladly pay you for it.


Translation:_
"I have a massive inferiority complex about anyone in the professions and I'm tight when it comes to paying fees."_

Well, I'm glad you finally got all that off your chest, because it certainly fills out the first impression you  made.
At least now any sole trader who accepts your commission will have a fair idea what they're getting into.
They should  formally agree the fee, brief and information package and get you to sign off on them all.
That will confirm what you're getting for your money and may prevent them from getting burned.

HAND

ONQ.


----------



## RKQ (16 Jan 2010)

onq said:


> Of course, any potential client only had to ask where the diploma or degree Certificate was in the office to satisfy themselves that person they were dealign with was a qualified professional.


 
Or they could read the letters after their name!

The OP wrote an excellent post from the point of view of potential Clients. It might be worth listening & learning rather than trying to discredit the OP. 

I would hate to see a situation arise where one opinion is promoted and all different but equally valid opinions are nit picked to death. Once again I say all opinions are valid - shouting more or longer - doesn't make an individual right. High fees are no meassure of quality.

I think the OP asked a fair question, got answers, did their homework and made a decision. That should be the end of the matter.


----------



## Bronte (18 Jan 2010)

pjordan said:


> I just want the basics of what I need to get planning permission, whatever that lowest common denominator is this week or month.
> .


 
I paid a student or trainee 250 IEP for drawings for the conversion of a garage attached to a house into a two story building (extra rooms).  He supplied all the drawings and told me what to do to get planning, at that time an ad in the relevant paper and a sign outside the house.  I duly submitted the drawings, put in ad and put up sign.  I found the staff in the planning department more than helpful in the process.  There was something wrong with my ad and I had to do it again.  It's not rocket science.  When I build I will get a very good builder who knows what he is doing to build it and I'll get an engineer to make sure it complies with planning.  You are not building the Taj Mahal, but based on some of the posts on here I was beginning to think you were.

(My planning has since lapsed and there are new building regulations to contend with but I'm sure I'll manage to get planning again when I need to.)


----------



## GL01 (18 Jan 2010)

Pjordan,

I hope you don't think I was talking down to you or to anyone else reading this thread. My post was in reaction to your statement that you felt €120 would be a reasonable cost. You have since corrected yourself but to be fair you didn't make it clear that when you mentioned €120 you were referring to what you thought would be a reasonable discounted rate (by 70%) from your friend. If I sounded defensive you can surely understand that on reading your first post you did suggest €120 was reasonable.

Reading back over my post I don't feel that it contained any technical jargon, I just thought it was worth listing what was involved in a simple planning permission to give you an idea of where quotes come from. The fact that you have done some of the groundwork will not affect a quote. Your drawing time estimations are on the short side too. 

I won't comment on your opinion of architects and on your comparisons with nurses and doctors expect to say that you shouldn't allow your opinion to be solely based on the bad examples of our built environment; as ONQ said a lot of our poor buildings and developments did not have an architect involved but also, like anything, there are bad architects out there too! Instead maybe look around at the good buildings and spaces around the country and indeed around the world as Irish architects have started to make a name for themselves internationally. A small firm won World Building of the Year with their university building in Bocconi which is an incredible achievment.

Good luck with your garage, hopefully you'll find a quote that suits you and get through the planning process.


----------



## DBK100 (21 Jan 2010)

The way you calculate an appropriate fee for a job is to estimate the full time you think will be required to carry out the job
and
Apply an hourly rate that covers all of your overheads including professional indemnity, general insurance, rent, rates, utility bills etc., the appropriate amount per hour you (or a staff member) will / would like to take home to live off, all income tax / PRSI contributions and a reasonable amount for profit to allow for future investment in your business (to pay for equipment, software, professional subscriptions, continuing professional development etc.).
then
Multiply the time required by the hourly rate to arrive at an appropriate fee.

If you arrive at a sum of €450 for the work described - which apparently includes for a newspaper notice, planning application fee, a planning pack of O.S. maps and printing costs, then you have made a simple miscalculation.
Or
You don't charge for professional indemnity, general insurance, rent, rates, utility bills etc., income tax / PRSI contributions, equipment, software, professional subscriptions, continuing professional development etc, in which case you do not provide the client with the necessary skills, expertise and most importantly, professional protection that you will be held to have offered by a court if anything goes wrong,
Or
You wish to make a financial loss for every hour you work.


----------

