# Query re Architect/Project management team



## Thornbush (3 Feb 2012)

Looking for people's thoughts on the following. We engaged an Architect/Project manager team of two to design and supervise the build of a 2 storey extension to our North Dublin home. It's the first time we have ever undertaken a building project. They originally wanted a fee of 12.5% of the build cost for both services. We thought we'd have a budget of up to 200K and some really nice design features but reality bites and we have now cut it back substantially. We got them down to 11% and then capped the fee at 11% of 140K. Even if the build goes over they won't get more. We're now looking at a budget of no more than 160K but we feel that they are getting too much overall. In our research since engaging them, not once have we heard of the architect fee being this high. We know that we are also getting a Project manager for this price but still feel like they are asking too much in this current climate. We are having to compromise on our house build and are asking them to reduce their fee for the work. They do not want to do this. Are we foolish for even considering paying over €15k to them or is this what you do if you want to stay on budget and get back in on time??? We feel quite clueless right now...


----------



## lowCO2design (3 Feb 2012)

11% / 2 = 5.5% of 140g = 7700 at an hourly rate of circa €40-60 (remember they are self-employed and not on a wage and must pay associated costs, tax, overheads wages, insurance (F'n killer) etc ) 7700 each?is that right? how much do you make an hour? what every the rate double it and you've got a self-employed persons rate  (remember if your job runs over, someone else pays- if a self-employed person job runs over they pick-up the tab)

architect:60€hr = 128 that's 3 weeks
energy audit & survey of existing house? how long was the design process? how many revisions? 3d model? was planning required? balancing software packages to maximise energy and building fabric? any grief with the planners? details, tender drawings, detailed specification?  tender to several builders and assess prices? perferred builder construction details? weekly meetings ? on the phone to builder/PM? issues with existign elements on- site? final account arguing over moneys due or owed?

project manager: 40€hr = 192hrs that 4.8 weeks
on site every day? or contactable by phone? time scales, planning, material orders? specialist contractors? any hidden problems on site? duration of build, lead in time? management skills? smooth program? on-time? upfront?

if they were not providing this service would you have spent an equal amount of time (and sleepless nights) + taking time of work (so not earning), with confidence that you would come in on budget and time? and then there's knowledge/skill requirements also


----------



## threebedsemi (4 Feb 2012)

You need to break down the fee into what the architect is charging and what the project manager is charging. LowCo2design makes a lot of valid points re the hourly charge.

Re the Architect:
Have you appointed the Architect using the approved RIAI form of appointment? If so, read this form and that will outline what are getting in terms of service.

The whole 'project manager' thing gets on my nerves sometimes. Does he/she have any actual project management qualifications? Are you sure that they are doing anything more than asking a few of their buddies for quotes for the various packages of work? And what guarantees will you recieve at the end with regard to the quality of the finished building? 
A self styled 'Project Manager' does not need to have any qualifications or skills in thier role, as the title is not legally protected. 

A lot of PM fees equate pretty closely to what a contractor will charge as 'profit' to manage a job on site in any case (they are in effect taking the place of the main contractor, but perhaps with a lot less responsibility). 

The Architect - Contractor setup is in my opinion far preferable in most cases, for the following reasons:
- at least you have some comeback against the contrator (i.e. one point of responsibility),
- the Architect is independant to the contractor (is he independant from the PM? it doesn't seem so in this case), 
- you will have a fixed price at the start of the project an will have some certainty in this case.

I'm sure there are qualified, experienced Project Managers around who may offer you savings compared to going down the main contractor route,but it can be pretty hard to proove this. A lot of contractors are now working to very, very tight margins.

www.studioplustwo.com


----------



## Thornbush (6 Feb 2012)

Thanks for the replies lowCo2design and threebedsemi. At this stage I'm info gathering to get enough facts to feel like I'm making the right decision either way. lowCO2design, I am self employed so I appreciate what that working life is like however I believe that any self employed person can only have the luxury of charging by the hour when they are doing small jobs or attending to one off situations. Taking on a whole project requires an overall fee that is competitive with all other options out there. Re the question of would it not be worth the money to avoid the headache? Well I suppose that's what I'm asking everyone out there as I am completely inexperienced in that area and don't want to be penny pinching only to find out it was a false economy. 

threebedsemi: I do think the project manager in this case knows what he's talking about and I would hope that he'll produce the goods but I am interested to hear (for the 2nd time now) that if one has a full contractor and an architect on board there is no real need for PM too. We are following the RIAI agreement but I think the problem we have now is that the fee is for both services and not just the architect. We have paid 50% of the fee in good faith but adjustments need to be made to the drawings at this stage to take into consideration planning restrictions. Our understanding is that if we walked away now we would have no right to updated drawing to reflect final planning-only the original documents that were sent to the council seeking PP. This doesn't seem a very fair way of concluding the agreement (which can be cancelled at any stage). For over €7K should we not have a right to drawings that are reasonably final?


----------



## Superman (6 Feb 2012)

Thornbush said:


> For over €7K should we not have a right to drawings that are reasonably final?


What would concern me more is that you feel planning drawings (or finalised planning drawings) are important.
What is important is a full set of tender/construction drawings and specification.

There are a couple of reasons for having good tender documentation.
Firstly it will reduce the cost of the construction.
Secondly it means that when the builder prices something, you know exactly what it is he is pricing - which means you can compare prices from different contractors.
Thirdly because of the "contra proferentem" rule in contract law, any ambiguity in the contract may be interpreted by the builder any way he wants, and you have to pay for a change - there are far fewer ambiguities with good construction drawings.
Finally, it also means that (provided the designer is fairly competent), that the building is more likely to comply with building regulations - more likely only because there is  a shocking amount of incompetence about.

Good tender documents also allow the builder to better coordinate everything, have fewer questions on site and work quicker.


----------



## Thornbush (7 Feb 2012)

Hi Superman, you're completely right about the tender drawings being the most important but that would cost another chunk of the fee to this partnership that would mean we'd probably be as well of staying with them till the end. Kind of puts us at the point of no return. If we can get final planning drawings we can give them to an engineer friend of ours to flesh out into full drawings for the builders (he designed and built his own fabulous home). However I take on board your overall point and maybe staying with them would indeed be money well spent. Thanks for the feedback.


----------



## threebedsemi (7 Feb 2012)

It is pretty standard for an Architect to charge approx. 50% of his overall agreed fee up to planning stage. Note that this is 50% of the Architects free, not the overall bundle fee that you seem to have agreed. 

The PM is unlikely to have done too much work at this stage, so why you have paid 50% of the overall bundled fee is beyond me.

Again, you need to break down the fee into what you are paying the Architect and what you are paying the PM, and examine the breakdown of fees as stated in your agreement form with the Architect, and the appointment letter with the PM if there was one.

I agree strongly with the above comments relating to having a proper set of construction documents prepared.

Also, in terms of the PM appointment, are there any performance-based clauses in his appointment document (i.e. cost control, restrictions on him ordering works which go beyond your budget, finished building to reach 'B1' BER, etc.)? 

www.studioplustwo.com


----------

