# Architect produces design at twice budget



## zag (5 Sep 2011)

Hi all,

I'm looking for a little guidance here.  We're looking at extending our existing 1950s semi-D in suburban Dublin.  We got an architect in, went through our requirements, gave him our brief, our budget, etc . . .  We went through a number of rounds of drawings, revisions, etc . . . and of course added in a few bits over time.

Then he came back to us with indicative prices (about 3 months into the process) and according to his estimates the cost would be over twice the budget we gave him originally.  I'm a little dumbfounded to say the least.

I *know* that part of the process involves adding bits, taking out bits, etc . . . and we can't go for the gold plated toilet if we want a window in our living room.  But, is twice the budget a reasonable place to start ?  This basically means that the plans he has provided will need to be cut to shreds to fit into our budget.

What with the current economic blahdy blah I think our chances of getting twice the expected money out of the bank/nowhere just isn't an option.  So, we have to get it back down to budget somehow.  Probably by cutting out all the fancy schmancy stuff he added in and coming back to . . . our original plans.

I'm thinking that if I said I wanted a big slide down the front of the house he would be quick enough to say "you can't have that, it's against planning regulations", or I wanted to build a 15 metre high wall between me and the neighbours he would say "you can't have that either", so, *if* we added too much extra space during discussions, would it not be reasonable to expect the architect to at least flag up that "this will likely push you above budget, so you might want to consider a smaller space" ?

z


----------



## 44brendan (5 Sep 2011)

The best place to start here is to call the architect and discuss the issues you have with his proposal. While I'm not an architect I do provide a consultancy service and my priority would always be to insure that I am on the same wave-length as my client on what is required and that it is within the allocated budget. Without knowing the facts of this case you appear to have a legitimate dispute with the understanding of the budget allocated to the project and your best initial response is to speak to the architect on this. If this doesn't resolve the issue then you should set down the issues in writing to him and your proposed solution. Make sure you keep copies of any contact (phone/writing) in case the dispute is not resolved to everyones satisfaction.


----------



## McD1978 (5 Sep 2011)

I would take issue with any tradesman that does not take steps to keep reasonably inside a clients budget.  I would agree with 44brendan though, you should speak to the architect asap and/or get something down in writing to them that makes a start on finding a resolution to the issue.


----------



## onq (5 Sep 2011)

Hi zag,

Let's take a straightforward example.
Say you tell your architect your budget is €200,000.
You then brief him on a house design that starts off at 3,000 sq.ft. and ends up at circa 4,000 sq.ft.
Unless a builder is willing or able to build compliantly for €50 per square foot, you cannot stay within budget.

You are now faced with making decisions to trim your brief to allow you build what you can afford on today's budget.
Your concern arises because you were not expecting this cost, but this is expectation management, not costing accuracy.
Your architect's job as estimator is to give you an estimate on the finished design, not to try to price each instruction as it occurs.
Some instructions cannot be priced in this way, for example a change from concrete block to timber frame causes enormous follow on changes.

The architect will expect that his expertise is being retained to bring  suggestions of improvements and conceptual ideas to the table for discussion, as well as to accurately  cost the work as a whole.
An architect may suggest elements which will add unique qualities to the building and enhance the amenity of the dwelling - these are drawn from his experience and are part of what an architect brings to the table.

The difficulty with a dwelling, new or extended, is that most first-time builders start off with budgets for the work which may relate more to the cost of buying a new car, rather than building the whole or part of a dwelling and they can cause adverser reaction when their expectations of prices meet harsh reality.
I have found that the client may confuse the utility they pay for in a mode of transport which will last from 5 - 30 years depending on the vehicle and their lifestyle, with what they get with a building, which even with timber framing, should last 60 years and many forms of construction last hundreds of years, even spec-build Georgiana - its a whole different kind of expense and payback.

It is important, before the detailed costing review, to put everything into the mix, expand the brief without financial restriction and then review globally.
This is because items can be discovered during the freed-up design process which lead to an improved overall design, which may be selected to go forward.

If you adopt a process where every change is costed as you make it, this inhibits the design process by forcing consideration of details when an over view is needed.
Thus the design process is very much about this feedback loop, where indications of likely costs informs the client and designer as to what can affordably be constructed.

This design-and-costing-review cycle is not unique to housing design, it is an intrinsic part of the process of all design, from industrial to textiles to interior to buildings.
A further such cycle occurs when you go for tenders based on drawings produced by the architect for pricing - this is where on larger projects, a bill of quantities is useful.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon           as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal   action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in           Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the   matters    at      hand.


----------



## Docarch (5 Sep 2011)

onq said:


> You are now faced with making decisions to trim your brief to allow you build what you can afford on today's budget.


 
+ 1 and generally to ONQs comments. above. You really now need to cut your cloth...

As an architect, I constantly get briefs and budgets from clients that are _poles_ apart. Maybe your architect _should _have been clearer at the outset that your brief and budget did not match? 'Expectation managment' is a great phrase I use with clients a lot these days! 

Sometimes the architect will design to your brief first, to give you an idea of what you may be able to achieve design wise and to fulfill your brief. Then the architcet will cost/'ballpark' the design. It is then up to the client, with the professional input of the architcet, to decide the way forward.


----------



## onq (5 Sep 2011)

Hey Doc - long time no see.

What people want and what people are willing to pay are seldom one and the same, but its the first time I've heard someone have a go at an architect as if he someone how controls the cost of building.
The contractor controls the cost of building and he in turn is affected by the supply of compliant goods and workmanship.

I stress the issue of "compliance" because it is the law, and because there are a lot of untrained and poorly skilled people out there masquerading as competent contractors and/or tradesman, and they are taking work away from those with a proper trade and experience as a contractor.

There is a race to the bottom and beyond  at the moment, not just on fees with architects, but also with prices for building work.
A colleague reported that a builder he knew was told by the architect who asked him to price a job that he'd better come in below €50 a square foot or he could forget about any chance of being awarded the tender.

This is ridiculous!

Back in the mid nineties, IR£22-25 a square foot what what you'd build a bare industrial shed building for, shell only.
The conversion was what, €1.27 per Irish Punt IR£1.00?

So back then it was €27.94 - €31.75 per square foot to build a crinkley tin shed with concrete block walls up to 2.25M off the ground.
Spec built houses were IR£ 45.00 a square foot or so = €57.15.

I'm happy to stand corrected on that last estimate BTW but that's what I seem to recall back in the nineties, and that's the early to mid, not the mid to late nineties.
Contractors cannot build profitably or even at break even point at those levels - they will go bust in the middle of the job and you'll be lucky to get someone to take it over.
Even if you offer the going rate of between €80-€125 per square foot, the damage may already be done with poor ground clearance and preparation and poor foundations and rising walls.

You pay peanuts...


ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon            as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal    action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in            Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the    matters    at      hand.


----------



## zag (5 Sep 2011)

It's not a question of "willing to pay", it's "able to pay".

There's no point designing the perfect extension if the money isn't there to fund it.  My dad doesn't work for Anglo.  This isn't 2007.

z


----------



## jpd (6 Sep 2011)

One year ago, we started a large renovation project and engaged an architect to design and manage the project.

We were very insistant on our budget from the start. Yet the initial design, for which a planning application was lodged, when tenders came in was 66% higher than our budget!

We chastised the architect, and revised the plans completely - we didn't want to change architect at this time and re-start from scratch again. We submitted new plans and are now on the finsih straight.

So we are now on budget as regards the building works but at least 3 months behind our original schedule with increased rental costs.

I sympathise with the OP and am of the firm opinion that the architect (and possibly architects in general) didn't believe us when we said the budget is X because he was so used to X+50%, X+100%, ...

He should have pointed out that our original plans were incompatible with our budget and not let us get carried away with a more grandiose plans - after all, we could not be expected to be able to cost a project and we relied, foolishly as it turned out, on his  assertion that we could build the inital plan to budget. An over-estimation of 60% is not acceptable at all, never mind one of 100%


----------



## onq (6 Sep 2011)

zag said:


> It's not a question of "willing to pay", it's "able to pay".
> 
> There's no point designing the perfect extension if the money isn't there to fund it.  My dad doesn't work for Anglo.  This isn't 2007.
> 
> z



Nobody is suggesting that a budget should be ignored.
Nobody is suggesting you build the perfect extension NOW.

You plan it now and phase it, building what you can afford now.
Any accountant will tell you the main problem is one of scheduling.

There is nothing worse than NOT having the "perfect extension overview", but instead going ahead and building an extension, then finding out that if you had changed such an such, you would be able to build a much better overall extension in years to come.

The lack of foresight mistake which everyone comes to regret is not internalizing the servant spaces, i.e. Kitchen and Utility areas, and not burying services in the floor.
Failure to take this "Hit" early on may save a few quid, but with the kitchen and/or utility to the outside wall surrounding the space with high units and sill heights, you end up with limited views and poor direct access to the garden PLUS a darkened interior space.

I'm not suggesting this applies directly to your plan, but its typical of the issues that I have dealt with.
To a man almost, every client takes exception to my above suggestions, or a variation thereof. Not one has regretted doing so.
And by scheduling the work and the spend to suit their pockets, but only doing it ONCE and not having to redo it, they have usually saved money overall.

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon             as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal     action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in             Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the     matters    at      hand.


----------



## AlbacoreA (6 Sep 2011)

You can't keep adding things and expect the budget to remain the same, and you can't keep accepting changes without mentioning the budget. Sounds like a lack of communication from both parties.


----------



## hastalavista (6 Sep 2011)

onq said:


> .....the lack of foresight mistake which everyone comes to regret is not internalizing the servant spaces......



lol


----------



## onq (6 Sep 2011)

AlbacoreA said:


> You can't keep adding things and expect the budget to remain the same, and you can't keep accepting changes without mentioning the budget. Sounds like a lack of communication from both parties.



Anyone can find out (by reading AAM or Boards.ie or Bruce Shaws website or contacting the Society of Chartered Surveyors in Ireland) what the average cost for building compliantly is. You can achieve lower costs by self-building using direct labour and not taking professional advice but there are risks involved.

A simple calculation based on area using prices in the €85-125 per square foot costing can give you a ball park figure for your build. This works out at about €915-1346 per square metre. This is for shell only with standard finishes within a price range and can be varied hugely by finishes and fittings - Shalon Kitchen for €90,000 for example.

At the start of any project I pre-empt the kind of reaction seen above. I discuss a basic cost based on square footgage as a guide and confirm that any unusual structural elements or feature windows are likely to push up the cost. It is my experience that clients totally forget this advice.

During the design phase it is a sort of magical time when anything is possible and costs are seldom discussed. Everything comes down to earth with a bang, not by my cost estimate review - apart from the range above I won't offer an estimate in this market - but from the tender prices.

Oddly enough, you can be pleasantly surprised as a consequence of this process once the shock of the initial high cost has passed.

Sizing the building and amending the details to reduce the numbers of block cut and bring window ope sizes within a range of standard sizes using standard doors [not the very expensive full folding sets, for example] can hugely reduce the price of the build.

Instead of seeing an budget overrun as a reason for casting aspersions, it should be seen as a call to undertake a buildability and cost control review of the building design. This is a normal part of the process.


----------



## huskerdu (6 Sep 2011)

I sympathise with the OP.

This is a case of a client naively thinking that saying to an architect that the budget is x, will mean that the architect will have this in mind and only produce a plan that can be built within the budget and whenever a chance is mentioned, push back and say - "well that will go above the budget". 

I also, once upon a time, thought that when I was paying an architect for design and project management, that I would get some basic project management, but it was not to be. I should point out that I was very happy with the design aspect and had a great relationship with the architect, but was very disappointed by the project management side of the work. BTW, I am a Project Manager in engineering so I just did it myself. 

My experience of using an architect was that I clearly stated the budget at the first meeting and reiterated it on a regular basis and I was talking to the wall. The plans drawn up were for an extension that exceeded the budget and I got a blank look when I pointed this out.

ONQ have given some very good advice here, and I also sympathise with Architects that hav clients who dont think about the budget enough also.

However, I have heard so much anecdotal evidence of architects who ignore budgets that I have to conclude that it is a weakness in the profession. Obviusly not all architects are like that, but it is the one consistent critisism of architects that I have heard.


----------



## 44brendan (6 Sep 2011)

onq said:


> Instead of seeing an budget overrun as a reason for casting aspersions, it should be seen as a call to undertake a buildability and cost control review of the building design. This is a normal part of the process.


 
Without casting any asperations on any specific professional I would have thought that in the current climate particularly it is important to firmly establish the parameters of the clients budget in order to properly manage their expectations. I.e. while the client might look for a grandiose project on a shoestring budget the architect should realise when the budget is being well over-reached and advise accordingly. While a failure to do this might not be a breach of the contract it surely will create a problem when the final costs are totted up. If the client is made aware that he is moving beyond the busget then I agree that little can be done but surely the architect would be better advised to keep his/her feet on the ground in this context!


----------



## Patrick2008 (6 Sep 2011)

My advice is simple. Employ a good non chartered or chartered Quantity Surveyor. Of course I am biased as I am a Chartered QS. No harm in paying a QS €500-1000 to prepare a detailed cost plan and work with the Architect during the design process. Obviously all members of a design team are conscious of a clients budget but an Architects primary role is to design a house to a clients brief. However, if cost advice was reflected in the Architects fee then this is a different story. 

Too many people use the cost per m2 as a rough guide and even though this is a crude but affective method it will not give you any degree of cost certainty. e.g if your proposed house is a 4 bed ad you decide to add a bedroom it will have no affect on the cost of your kitchen. Certain elements of your build will remain. 

You also need to take into account the house design in terms of your budget. House shape, orientation, materials used, no. of rooms etc etc. 

I always think it is prudent to use the good old €100/sq.ft for your budget and more than likely your budget will come down. But you need to fully understand what is included in your budget. e.g pre planning costs, planning costs, site purchase costs, design team fees, construction costs, utility charges, financial contributions, connection charges, road opening licenses, insurances etc etc. I could go on and on but then I'd have to start charging for the advice!!!!!!!

On a final note, it scares me to think how many self builders are totally depending on websites like askaboutmoney, boards.ie etc to seek advice on building their houses considering most self builds cost in the region of €150k +. In the UK most self builders employ an Architect and at some stage of their self build they employ the services of a good QS or a very commercially aware project manager or foreman.


----------



## QED (6 Sep 2011)

huskerdu said:


> However, I have heard so much anecdotal evidence of architects who ignore budgets that I have to conclude that it is a weakness in the profession. Obviusly not all architects are like that, but it is the one consistent critisism of architects that I have heard.


 
That reminds me of the Architect on the RTE show where people built extensions. They were always very nice extension but always over budget. 

The original plan would be over budget but the clients would decide it was worth it. It would inevitably finish costing more than the updated budget too.


----------



## Patrick2008 (6 Sep 2011)

Also, my brother in law and his partner are building a 2,974 sq.ft house in Tipperary and they expect to build it for €160,000. Naturally I offered my advice free of charge but she did not want it. I think she is happy to live in her dream world and expect to build a house for €54/sq.ft. Of course it is the usual story. Her brother is a carpenter, her uncle is a plasterer and her cousin is a magician!!!! All jokes aside, when I question them on what is included in the €160k they give very vague answers. They paid €50k for the site so their overall cost could be €210k. And theyhave to finish and furnish the house.

I cannot understand why the banks dot insist on a Chartered Quantity Surveyor been part of the process. I know the banks ask for a MRIAI, IEI or SCS professional to sign off on the costings but we all know that these are aspirations rather than a truly independent and detailed cost breakdown.


----------



## onq (6 Sep 2011)

Patrick2008 said:


> But you need to fully understand what is included in your budget. e.g pre planning costs, planning costs, site purchase costs, design team fees, construction costs, utility charges, financial contributions, connection charges, road opening licenses, insurances etc etc. I could go on and on but then I'd have to start charging for the advice!!!!!!!



Without asking you to compromise your profession, would you consider that posting a list of cost headings could be appropriate, Patrick? Just to offer people reading a chance to understand the cost breakdown process. No problem if this is an issue for you.

ONQ.


----------



## onq (6 Sep 2011)

QED said:


> That reminds me of the Architect on the RTE show where people built extensions. They were always very nice extension but always over budget.
> 
> The original plan would be over budget but the clients would decide it was worth it. It would inevitably finish costing more than the updated budget too.



[broken link removed]

This is the avowed agenda of most architects - the pursuit of excellence in design.
By their nature architects design up to a standard, rather than down to a price, but there is a balance.

They are not necessarily pushing up their fees, because in many cases these will have been set at the start of the project.
They are pushing up the quality of the design, and as they are not themselves contractors involved in the build, there is no payback for them except the design in their portfolio.

Many people go through this transformative process, whereby an increased extra-over cost is justified by having an unique design which improves the amenity-in-use and eventual saleability of the house.

I looked at one extension a while back which added immeasurably to the property, but I could see it cost significantly more than a standard "one-bay-off-the-back-with-kitchen" addition would cost.
Sometimes its as simple as finding a new way to bring light into the depth of the original room - I was surprised by light!


ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon              as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal      action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in              Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the      matters    at      hand.


----------



## Patrick2008 (6 Sep 2011)

As requested by ONQ please see below a typical list of construction headings for a house build. I have split the Preliminaries section into more detail and included direct expenses. The headings are fairly high level and in trade format where possible. A typical detailed cost estimate for a house will consist of 12 pages of cost information so as you can appreciate this is only a summary. Please note that this checklist is not in accordance with ARM4 (The Agreed Rules of Measurement 4). However, this list is sufficient for self builders in terms of preparing budgets etc. 

The most important question always to ask a contractor, tradesman or supplier is if their price includes or excludes VAT. Also, remember that a supply only item has a VAT rate of 21% whereas a supply and fit item has a VAT rate of 13.5%. I won't complicate things by trying to explain the 2/3's VAT rule; e.g a security systems contractor would charge 21% VAT). 

*Construction Headings Checklist*

1. Preliminaries / Direct Expenses
Site staff & site labour costs
Scaffolding
Skips
EL & PL Insurances
Fuel & Oil
Homebond registration fees
Planning fees and charges.
Fire certificate fees 
Site investigation and surveys 
Archaeology survey / excavations
Financial contributions (Local Authority Contributions) 
Utility suppliers fees & charges 
Lighting/heating/power
Machine hire
Security
Architect fees
Structural Engineer fees
Quantity Surveying fees
Legal fees
BER Certs 
Energy Consultant 
Air Tightness Specialist

2. Demolitions & Alterations
3. Basement
4. Groundwork’s (inside curtilage of house) 
5. Brickwork and Blockwork
6. Plastering & Studwork
7. Carpentry
8. Ironmongery
9. Stone Cladding
10. External Doors and Windows
11. Painter
12. Balustrades and Handrails
13. Tiling
14. Waterproofing and Roof Membrane
15. Rainwater Disposal
16. Roof Tiling & Solar Panels
17. Metalwork
18. Mechanical Installation
19. Heat Recovery 
20. Rainwater Harvesting
21. Sanitaryware
22. Electrical Installation
23. Lift Installation
24. Insulation  
25. Air Tightness
26. Built-In Furniture and Fittings
27. Hard and Soft Landscaping
28. Timber gates and fencing
29. Precast Concrete
30. Structural Steelwork
31. Roof and Wall Cladding
32. Siteworks (outside curtilage of house)

*Typical Exclusions*

1. Inflation
2. VAT
3. Contingency & Provisional Sums
4. Land Acquisition costs
5. Loose furniture, fittings and equipment
6. Financing costs


----------



## onq (6 Sep 2011)

Thanks Patrick.

That's a very good laypersons guide and I would refer clients to it.
I find a list of items like this can be very useful for people reviewing tenders.
Its easy to see where below-price tenders fall apart when you break them down.

Couple of comments:

*Major Items List*

Ventilation
MVHR systems,with their soundproofing and fireproofing issues, all attract significant additional costs
A note could be usefully given to the client to allow for replacement filters, fans and servicing costs in use.

Insulation Generally
This is now becoming such a serious expense that it is a separate item on my list.
It includes specialist measures including sealing membranes internally and externally (in cavity wind-sealing) depending on the construction.

Rainwater Harvesting
Many people are now asking for advice on Rainwater Harvesting as opposed to disposal.
Companies like that one I cannot recall just now down in Cork have systems already on the market.
This is likely to become a bigger factor as the new water charges are introduced by the present government.
*
Items Excluded*

One major exclusion is -
Local Authority Contributions and Levies.
This a figure that has gone to ridiculous levels in some local authoritys - as much as 10% of the Nett Build Cost.

The other is -
Developers Bonds/Insurances.
This mainly comes into play for developers or people clubbing together to build a small estate, but group schemes are becoming popular.

These are just the obvious ones where I see divergence between the traditional list of items and newer work.


ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon               as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal       action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in               Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the       matters    at      hand.


----------



## Patrick2008 (6 Sep 2011)

Ok. I have made some changes as per ONQ's comments. Much appreciated as always. I've tried to keep the list as simple as possible and not make it too technical as the back up detail to each heading will vary depending on design, specification etc. 

I can't emphasise enoough that people also look at the life cycle costs of their house and not just the construction costs. Most self builders will end up in their house for at least 25 years so if the design is not thought out fully in the first place then the running costs could far out weigh the capital costs. 

I know you might want a 4 bed house with play room, sun room, study etc but the kids will be gone in 15 years and you will be left with a big empty house which is expensive to run.


----------



## onq (6 Sep 2011)

Patrick,

Your comments about life cycle costs are important and support the OP's general concern's about costs.
Many posters to AAM and boards.ie tell of houses in the 3,500 sq.ft. range, which dwarf the average home.

Far be it for me to tell people how to spend their money, but its clear  some of them haven't got it to spend.
After all, they are taking on a project which could top €500,000 without any professional or main contractor!

Its important for architects and clients alike to remember that "small is beautiful".
A house of 3,500 square feet that is A1 rated will cost more to heat than a house of 2,000 square feet that is A1 rated.

Houses that initially appear to offer vastly reduced heating costs because they use ambient sources like solar, wind or geothermal to support 20 degrees of internal temperature in the winter do not look so economical when you factor in the replacement cost of their parts, i.e. the pumps and filters, into the equation.

The best way to save energy is to design the building to take advantage of ambient energy like solar through appropriately orientated glazed areas, gather the heat in massive heat stores, and prevent loss through use of passive systems like glazing and insulation.

No working parts = no replacement costs.

The other means of cutting bills is simply to use less energy.

This applies whether its to heat the house, to cook or take showers. 
Eat more salads and fruit and don't take twenty minute showers - hop in and out. 

20 degree ifestyle heating is a luxury - 16 degrees is fine for people who wear clothes.
Plus it uses your own internal heating system better and burns off a few calories - can't be bad. 


ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon                as a defence or support - in and of itself - should legal        action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in                Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the        matters    at      hand.


----------



## zag (19 Sep 2011)

Yeah, we've gone down the QS route since I originally posted.  It seems to be money well spent.  It really does seem that budget is secondary to design from an architects point of view *in my experience*.  At least with the QS you get an idea whether something is "efficient" in terms of cost/benefit.  This at least gives me a basis for deciding which bits to modify or cut out.

To me the whole experience it a little like the old "consultant" thing in the hospital.  You go in with one set of symptoms, the consultant says "we're going to have to amputate" and you take his word for it because, well, because he's the consultant (or in this case the architect), and he doesn't take well to 'bodies' making suggestions about what to do instead.

I feel that the architect should have presented two sets of costings rather than just the single one.  One based on the ideal (and I can see the reasons for doing that in general terms) and also one that was at least within spitting distance of my budget so I can see what I can effectively cut out.  The reductions on his side would be coming from efficiencies that he can recommend - replace this material with this, replace this huge window with a smaller one and a block surround, etc . . .

z


----------



## onq (19 Sep 2011)

Its all very well to suggest what an architect should or shouldn't do.

Would you have paid him to produce two sets of drawings for costing purposes?

ONQ.

[broken link removed]

All advice on AAM is remote from the situation and cannot be relied upon                 as a defence or support - in and of itself - should  legal        action    be      taken.
Competent legal and building professionals should be asked to advise in                 Real Life with rights to inspect and issue reports on the         matters    at      hand.


----------



## zag (19 Sep 2011)

Yes, I would.  Just like I'm paying the QS to produce useful pricing.  As I said above, money well spent.

You could flip your question on its head and ask "would you pay him to produce a set of drawings that took no account of one of your primary constraints ?"

z


----------



## onq (19 Sep 2011)

zag said:


> Yes, I would.  Just like I'm paying the QS to produce useful pricing.  As I said above, money well spent.


Most clients wouldn't.


> You could flip your question on its head and ask "would you pay him to produce a set of drawings that took no account of one of your primary constraints ?"
> z


You could, or you could simply read post number 4 in this thread where I already addressed the why's and wherefore's of all this.


----------



## Derc1 (13 Apr 2012)

I agree with the OP and feel that the architect should take the budget into account if they take on the job. If he feels that the budget is not realistic, then he should say this before going through the whole process of designing, drawing up plans, etc. Clients go to architects for their skills, but assume that their brief will be taken into account and part of that brief is the budget. 

If the archtect is not skilled enough in costing the build or designing to a set budget, then why do they not have a QS working with them to come up with a complete package for the client, instead of expecting the client to choose an architect and then also find a QS. Surely if they were working as a team they could work more efficiently which would result in a better and more accurate design and cost for the client.


----------



## kkelliher (13 Apr 2012)

Derc1 said:


> If the archtect is not skilled enough in costing the build or designing to a set budget, then why do they not have a QS working with them to come up with a complete package for the client, instead of expecting the client to choose an architect and then also find a QS. Surely if they were working as a team they could work more efficiently which would result in a better and more accurate design and cost for the client.


 
Very good point

This is generally what is happening more and more in the industry which is evolving on the back of the downturn and the constraints put on clients budgets. It makes perfect sence to have the correct people in the correct positions in any business and this is no different


----------



## lowCO2design (14 Apr 2012)

KKelliher,
As an arch tech I have trouble selling this service to clients at an early stage and end up using retarded msq 'rough costs' 

what do you charge at pre-planning/sketch design stage for a QS assessment (you know + or - 15% sort of figure) ? 
and how do you work your fee for subsequent revisions to design... 

I've followed the other thread  re circa 1.5g for tender stage (on 'plank.ie' as Savage calls it) thanks


----------



## kkelliher (14 Apr 2012)

You shouldnt expect to pay any more than €300 plus vat for an initial costing. You need it to have detail and not just a per ft2 cost plan as this can be very open ended and unless specific the costs can change quickly to tender stahe


----------



## putsch (13 Feb 2013)

I've found this thread very interesting reading as I hopefully embark on a substantial renovation project. On the question of architects' fees my understanding is that they are generally a % of the overall project costs. My concern is that there are elements of the project that will have significant costs attached but where the architects input will be nil or negligible e.g. landscaping and patios. Should I exclude those parts from the contract and deal with them myself directly? I may well get the same builder to do the works but don't need any design input as a family member is experienced gardener/landscaper.

thanks


----------



## lowCO2design (16 Feb 2013)

putsch said:


> On the question of architects' fees my understanding is that they are generally a % of the overall project costs.


 not always


> My concern is that there are elements of the project that will have significant costs attached but where the architects input will be nil or negligible e.g. landscaping and patios.


an architects jobs often includes managing other consultants such as landscape designers. 





> Should I exclude those parts from the contract and deal with them myself directly?


you can leave this element out of the contract, and deal with the trade directly if you wish, i fail to see how it would impact greatly on a architects fee. note: that if this is the case the landscaper may need some involvement/ payment at planning stage when the layout is being agreed with the planners. your architect depending on the design may have some input here as well


----------

