# New extension: what roles for Architect, QS for best results



## David_Dublin (6 Sep 2012)

Hi All. Hoping people can offer advice as to the best way to run a project & assign responsibility for the various stages/requirements. 

The project is to put a two storey extension onto our home. It needs planning permission. There is nothing majorly complex about the build from an engineering perspective - apex roof on the second storey, no steels required for existing walls etc. The plan would be to use an architect and a QS, not sure if I need an engineer.

My plan for the build would be thus:

1. *Decide on an  Architect*: having talked to a few architects, will talk to some more that we have shortlisted based on  their work & experience in other similar builds. We have a pretty clear idea of what we want to build, and it has been confirmed as a good use of space.

2. *Draw up the plans* - the assigned architect will then draw up the plans. Maybe a bit of to-ing & fro-ing. But essentially this will give us the layout we will be building. Rough costs should be available as part of this service from the architect.

3. *Planning Permission* - to be applied for by the architect. As soon as we're happy with the plans. Talk to neighbours first!

3. *Decide on fit out & finishes* - all the detailed stuff that will need to go into the tender document, and will help determine what should be a more accurate costing. What we really want the architect to bring is the little stuff, good ideas  for storage, nice ideas for finishes, second guessing us to ensure that the delivered project maximises use of space, ensures the finishes are complementary, makes sure no stupid mistakes are made, ensures that the fixed price quote from the successful tender does not end up with lots of overruns.

4. *Bill of Costs* (optional) - Assign a QS at this stage to ensure we have a really accurate quote of what costs to expect. Not sure if we'll do this. What I am struggling with is that the Tender will determine the schedule of works, and the finishes. The contractors respond to tender telling you how much they will charge for this. So how is the bill of costs relevant? The actual cost is what the builder charges you, not the "notional" charge the QS applies. Is the real value of this determining a more realistic value on all the bits and pieces that we will be sourcing and providing to the builder for inclusion in the build, like kitchen, bathroom, flooring etc. I think this is probably the case.

5. *Run the tender & select contractor* - The architect can run the tender. If I have a QS assigned already, they could run it too, or I assign a QS to run the tender. In a way I would be happier if the QS did this as I believe they are more likely to spot the small stuff, but that is probably doing a disservice to the Architect, and it probably more depends on the individuals and their professionalism and capabilities/experience.

6. *The build* - As I understand it, the architect would have to be involved here for sign off of the plans against the planning permission. Does this stage need an engineer? Presumably engineer cost/requirement would be set in the tender responses, and unless something unexpected comes up, there are no additional fee implications for engineers during the build.
The QS or Architect can be tasked with the project management side of things, site reviews etc. Any thoughts on what is preferable? 
In a way, I would like the QS continually involved for negotiation on variances from the tender; for help with sourcing where the tender included an estimate for supplier of things like windows; and for general cost management so that any item going above the tender cost is communicated to the QS rather than to me. I suppose the architect could do this but I'd prefer a QS on my side.

I know there's a lot in the above, and quite a few questions. I'm hoping that, in general, my approach is ok. I know I'm not inventing the wheel here, but I would like to hear the differing opinions of when to include a QS in particular, and the pro's and con's of using the QS for the project management.

I'd also like to hear of people who did the project with smaller fees. I know of someone who got some sort of engineer to draw up detailed plans, and run the project. Is there a way to keep fees down, if you start from the assumption that we know structurally exactly what we want, and we have a fairly good idea of what way we want to fit it out and finish it. Could we then just use a QS and some sort of experienced draftsman, with the Architect just for sign off of planning. This is all based on the starting point of the build being simple (as an architect has already confirmed), and us having a very clear idea of what we want.

Thanks for taking the time to read this!


----------



## Docarch (6 Sep 2012)

Wow! There is a lot in there to consider! 

In brief.

I'd just suggest you select an architect _very_ carefully. Don't just base on fees (i.e. the lowest fee). Look at previous work. Have they a track record in your type of project? How long are they established? Get references from previous clients (also discuss with previous clients issues like cost control/project management). Ask to see a sample of tender documents. 

This, by the way, is how I get my work! Not alone do I show (potential) clients the nice pictures - I also put emphasis on the technical and cost control abilities the architect can bring to the project. 

I know all the QSs will start screaming!  But, for the size of the project you are talking about, in my opinion, you really do not need a QS for the tender/construction stages of your project (you will no doubt get posts to the contrary!). 

If you have a _good_ architect (there are lots of good ones and also lots of bad ones too - both registered and unregistered!) they will (or should) put together a very concise set of tender drawings and specifications for builders to price (including a schedule of rates for builders to price/fill out for use, if required, during the construction stage for valuing extras if they arise). This, in my opinion, is the most crucial stage of any project in relation to the construction stage and cost control. The more detail and information that goes in at this stage, the less hassle and cost overruns/extras at construction stage. Fail to prepare....and all that.  

During the construction stage the architect will also administer a building contract for you, as well as control costs, retention, etc. But there is a lot more to it than that! 

Like everything else in this world, there are pros and cons for each approach (i.e. with and withoit QS). I'm sure you hear the QS side too!


----------



## David_Dublin (6 Sep 2012)

....David takes a step back, and lets battle commence between the Archs & the QSs.......

But seriously, I just wanted validation that there are decisions to be made, and that I have summarised the steps & choices.

The one thing I am slightly unclear about is the Engineer - is that something that the contractor usually supplies as part of their service & cost, or is it someone recruited as a third party & incurs a fee?


----------



## David_Dublin (6 Sep 2012)

Thanks Alser.


----------



## Docarch (6 Sep 2012)

alser said:


> "The devil is in the detail" i.e. 3 drawings wont be good enough to tender on. Depend on how good your Architect is.
> 
> As for an engineer, to get the detail at tender stage you might appoint at tender. the Engineer will let you know size of foundations, size of steel if required at opening or opening in existing wall, can i demolish this wall etc


 
+1 on both counts.  

I would usually suggest the appointment of an engineer once the design is finalised/agreed to produce necessary information for tender.  

Like the QS's, I hope not to p**s off the engineers, , but on a domestic extension an engineer is not usually required prior to this stage as a _*good*_ architect will also have a good general grasp of structure and what's possible/not possible and/or relatively cheap/expensive in terms of structure.  

If as you say your project is quite straight forward/simple the engineers role will be quite limited and associated fees will reflect that.  

Like good and bad architects, just to point out the same applies to QS's and engineers!  I have seen QS's totally over measure when preparing a BOQ (you might get some saving at the end, but initial price/tender will be high as a result) and the one of the most common (invisible) cost issues I see if engineers over specifying structural steelwork - factors of safety that would only be seen in aircraft manufacture!


----------



## David_Dublin (6 Sep 2012)

Thanks for that. Interesting point about the tender cost being higher when BOQ too detailed. Amused by the comment re the over-zealous engineer, perhaps childhood family holidays spent in the tornado belt in southern states USA to blame


----------



## Docarch (6 Sep 2012)

David_Dublin said:


> Thanks for that. Interesting point about the tender cost being higher when BOQ too detailed.


 
Rather than being too detailed, what I mean by over measured is that too much material has been quantified in the BOQ. 

One example that I came across recently was that I had designed a roof, engineer had specified roof timber sizing and spacings, QS took those and specified in the BOQ (to simplify) 1000 linear metres of (whatever size) rafter was required - turns out that only 750 linear metres is required (to follow arch and eng plans). O.k., the saving was passed on at final account after re-measure/inspection on site, but the initial tender price reflected the over measure. The same applied, in this particular case, to block work and a few other items so tender prices were all higher than they should be. 

This is not an isolated example, I have come across it on a number of jobs. In one case I had a builder refuse to price the BOQ as the over measure quickly became apparent when he was pricing and he offered to price only on the basis of arch and eng drawings. The reason he did not want to price the over measured BOQ was that he did not want to submit a high price, as per the quantities specified, knowing that whatever price he submitted, during the contract would be cut down. 

If the savings are passed on, all well and good, but the intial, higher tender prices could/can make the difference between the project going ahead and not going ahead.


----------



## Docarch (6 Sep 2012)

I should just add and apologise to all the good QS's and Engineers out there!    I work with lots of good ones.

There is often a lot of criticism about bad, incompetent and indifferent architects out there and on this type of forum, really what I just wanted to highlight is this applies to all construction professionals.

The lesson is to be careful who you appoint to your project and vet all professionals, seek references, etc.  Don't just jump at the guy with the lowest fee - it may well cost you in the short/long run.


----------

