What do Architects DO to earn their money?

M

Meccano

Guest
I understand that the 'going rate' for an architect to design a house, get the planning permission, and make a few visits (about 4) to the site during construction - is about 10% of the building cost?

So if I'm building a house which might cost 200K in Monaghan, but is likely to cost me 400K in Dublin (thanks to inflated builders fees) I'm expected to pay the architect 40K for the above work?

If I was in Monaghan the same work would earn him 20K.

What EXACTLY do architects do to deserve this kind of fee?
Draw a few lines on a page. Submit it to the planners. Make a few changes and resubmit. Then spend a few hours on the site - and get 40K for it? WHY?

Are any architects out there charging realistic fees?
Personally I think the work involved is worth around 1 or 2% of the basic build cost and not a penny more.
 
for a house of 200-220k I paid less than 5k. This is in the mid-west, it was a flat fee.

I'd say negotiate a flat fee, I've never heard of % fees for an architect &, fundamentally, I dont agree with the concept of % fees.

I think you pay someone well for a job well done but what do they think they should participate in a % of the transaction?? Are they taking any of the risk???

Same holds for auctioneers (surely the softest money on the planet), solicitors etc.
 
We're getting work done at home. The architect charged a flat fee to get us past the planning process, then 5% for the cost of the building work.

So far, it is money well spent. He is able to challenge the builder and between them they identify alternative solutions that have, to date, worked out in our favour.

The architect has met with us in our house in the evening, i.e. we don't have to take time off work or have kids minded to meet with him during business hours.

Now, there are a queue of people we know that are looking to put work his way.
 
My old boss used to say to me- I get paid for what I know, not what I do. Id imagine the architects do a lot of unseen work in their offices, no?
 
TarfHead said:
The architect charged ...5% for the cost of the building work. ... He is able to challenge the builder and between them they identify alternative solutions that have, to date, worked out in our favour.
Click to expand...

If you are paying your architect a % of the building cost, you are providing him with a direct financial incentive to inflate the cost of your project. Don't be surprised if he conspires with the builder to push up costs on most fronts then sell the benefits to you of supposed "savings" on a number of minor issues.
 
I'll give a more in depth answer later:

It depends on the work you are getting done.

If it is simply an ordinary house, then paying 8% for that is ridiculous.
Going to an architect for an "ordinary" house, you should expect to pay slightly more than going to an engineer - of the order of 10% more, (it will look better and it will probably function better in terms of orientation etc.)

For this type of service, what Betsy Og has spent is at the upper end of what you need to be paying.


One should only be charged 8% for an architecturally challenging building - which would involve a couple of weeks designing the thing as well as the design being brought through to the working drawing stage. (i.e., so if the design calls for a large double height glass space that makes you say "wow", that the detailing of the space, the quality of the structure holding up the glass, the materials around it etc. are all in keeping with the "wow" effect.
If you look at the designs that win the architectural awards, you'll see projects where a wall becomes a seat becomes dining table etc. That's the type of stuff that costs a lot of money to design.
 
ubiquitous said:
Don't be surprised if he conspires with the builder to push up costs on most fronts then sell the benefits to you of supposed "savings" on a number of minor issues.
Click to expand...

On the contrary - he is actively challenging the builder on some of the cost components. The PC SUM for one piece of work as €4000. The builder is saying the actual was €1950 and the architect is saying that is too high. He withheld 8% from the first invoice to put down a marker that the final invoice amount will be debated and challenged.

With respect to the 5%, and this is not confined to architects, it is calculated on the gross (i.e. VAT inclusive) of the builders charge. So we're paying VAT on the VAT.
 
Fair enough. My point is really that "% of construction cost" deals are totally inappropriate to construction projects because they incentivise overspending. Hopefully your architect and builder won't take advantage of this.
 
Hmmm...it seems this quoted 10% is a load of nonsense then, even though its stated on the RIAI website at the following link: [broken link removed]

Good point about the VAT being included in that calculation of fees too!
 
It's not really a "load of nonsense" - you'll see that the spread of prices is quite large and some firms do (or would) charge 10%. It is also quite likely that a number of the larger firms who responded to the survey do not in fact do any one off houses and have responded to the survey with a notional amount of how much they feel they would charge if they did that kind of work. I know a number of architectural firms who don't go anywhere near one off projects because of the amount of work involved in them.

Also you'll note that the spread of fees charged is quite large.

There are even firms in Dublin who can charge up to 20% for a one off design.
 
I'll state my own conflict of interest first: I work in the industry, I' m not an architect but I do work with architects in my everyday role and a have a number of good architect friends. Secondly there are good and bad architects, just as there are good and bad in every profession or trade. A good architect will come up with an original design and concept, tailored to your requirements, taste and budget. He designs, details, makes the relevant applications, works with other building professionals, procures the contractor, supervises and delivers the finished package. He works for the client, not the builder- the argument that an architect would collude with a builder to jack up prices so as to increase his own fee is ridiculous. Having worked with architects for 15 years or more I can honestly say that as a profession it is not one that rewards its members handsomely. A good architect can expect a reasonable living but most of the good architects I know work in architecture because they love it, they have design flair and enjoy the type of problem solving that architecture and building brings with it. I'd certainly concur with the suggestion that estate agents probably earn the softest money on the planet. Our world and built environment would be very poorly off without good designers, architects and engineers.
 
The contact that I've had with (2) architects so far has been far from encouraging. I've found them both highly unreliable, to the point of crass unprofessionalism.
They repeatedly fail to meet targets, fail to return phone calls or answer emails, and fail to apologise when they know they've behaved badly. They come up with great excuses - but often a shrug of the shoulders is their only response to a complaint. I don't know how they get away with it - if I did the same in my line of work I'd be out of business pretty quick.

Maybe I just met some bad ones, eh?
 
While innovative design costs, and rightly so, in the real world people need arichitects to get them through the planning process and the designs are often fairly standard.

In our case we ended up spoonfeeding the architect with a photo of the front of a house we liked, with the internal layout worked out by ourselves.

So I suppose what we got was a draughtsman and planning process service, which I was quite happy with so definitely not complaining. However if he's said that'll be 8% or 10% the build price I would have been quite perturbed...
 
Meccano said:
The contact that I've had with (2) architects so far has been far from encouraging. I've found them both highly unreliable, to the point of crass unprofessionalism.
?
Click to expand...
Are they members of the RIAI?
As an aside, there seems to be quite a number of people claiming to be architects, when they are not. (Sometimes they advertise as architectural services)
 
Right then, what are the alternatives?

MUST I have an architect to draw the plans? Or can a 'draftsman' of some class do that?

And MUST I have an architect to apply for planning permission?

And when I have my planning permission - what EXACTLY do I need an architect for? Can any other (cheaper) individual sign off on the various stages of the work?

If I was paying some bloke to do all the above and he was demanding 10% I'd expect him to be parked at my door for 6 or 9 months supervising everything. But thats not what happens, is it. So 40K for a 'part time' job is ridiculous.

Carpenter - you say architects don't make a great living? How many projects like mine can you take on in a year?
Certainly two!
Probably 3, possibly 4, and most likely 5 or 6!

Multiply that 40K by 6 and you get a damn good living!
 
Meccano said:
Carpenter - you say architects don't make a great living? How many projects like mine can you take on in a year?
Certainly two!
Probably 3, possibly 4, and most likely 5 or 6!

Multiply that 40K by 6 and you get a damn good living!
Click to expand...

I'm not an architect, as I said, but I have a good friend who I believe to be a talented architect with really good design skills. He's just recently set up on his own after working for a large practice for many years. My friend has completed less than a half dozen decent projects to date, drives a 10 year old car, employs two staff and re-invests all profits (meagre enough after expenses) back into the business. It's quite expensive to run an architectural office and studio- Autocad and other software licenses can cost €3000 a piece, travel, phone, professional subscriptions, training, continuing professional development etc etc all add to the costs. I know for a fact that very few architects can actually command the full RIAI scale of fees for their work- most architects are compelled to work for reduced scale of fees, in what is a very competitive market. Very often people will spend more on a jacuzzi bath or a designer wardrobe system than they will on the design of their dream home- a shame really when you consider that a lot of dross has been constructed in the last 10 years or so, spoiling our landscape and for the most part no architect or designer was involved.
 
Aren't you paying for the architect to sign a completion cert confirming that the final property complies with all building regulations (and the PI insurance to support any claims)?
 
and the PI insurance to support any claims
Click to expand...
And how much would THAT cost?
Am I expected to solely fund his annual premium out of my own pocket?

a lot of dross has been constructed in the last 10 years or so, spoiling our landscape
Click to expand...
And you know who's responsible for that Carpenter, better than I do. Our rural Bungalow Blitz is 99% down to moronic Local Planners who insist that everything must be BOX SHAPED and SINGLE STOREY and PAINTED WHITE.
 
Meccano said:
And you know who's responsible for that Carpenter, better than I do. Our rural Bungalow Blitz is 99% down to moronic Local Planners who insist that everything must be BOX SHAPED and SINGLE STOREY and PAINTED WHITE.
Click to expand...

I think the blame for much of this can be equally split amongst bad planners and the majority of homeowners who build these homes without a thought for quality of design, consideration for the landscape or the appropriateness of large suburban scale f*** off 5 bed monstrosities, "designed" by people without qualification experience or knowledge appropriate to the task. Cork County Council have produced an excellent publication which should be a compulsory purchase for anyone contemplating building in the rural setting.
 
I don't know much about rural Cork, but here in Dublin, in an urban setting, I've been refused permission to do anything but a basic brain-dead boxy extension by the local planners. Painted WHITE of course.

Meanwhile, near Howth I saw an avant-garde building being put up in a 1930's streetscape. Fair f**ks I thought, to the guy who managed to get permission (probably a Brown Envelope job I guessed).

But NO - it turns out its ...... A LIBRARY!
Built by the CoCo to their own preferences.
Feckin HYPOCRITES.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top