[Closed] Architect fees

Maybe about 5-8% of the build cost.
However it might be in both of your interests to agree a fixed fee maybe based on workstages.

for a new house you should be budgeting more like 15% of build cost, RIBA fee scales recommend approx 15%. the build cost of the house will depend on location materials etc therefore the fee will unless you negotiate a fixed fee as mentioned above.

don't forget the structural engineer!

Seek pre app from the planning dept first, architects don't know as much as they should!

I would still suggest that you agree a series of fixed fee packages. for example - initial design, planning, detail design/ production information, tender, construction, close out.

Neither to Planners.

You need to be realistic and understand what YOU want first before appointing any Professional. How much design creativaty do you want? Do you want a landmark building or something you can get on a Barrets estate? You'll quickly sour any relationship if 'waste' time being vague - although any Professional will have a terms that allow for their fees to be revised should the Instruction change signifficantly / repeatedly.

15% of the build cost is a good budgetry figure but you need to add VAT onto that too. Plus the other Professionals - Structural Engineer has already been mentioned depending on your spec a Services Engineer will be needed to. Then there's the Planning Consent and Building Control applications and Warranty Indemities. Possible Party Wall matters too. Then QS and Project Management fees potentially too.

Budgeting the Build Cost is where you should start. A single detached house private development a rate of £1350 per sq m should allow for something very nice.

My 5-8% is based on much, much bigger projects - sorry I'm a bit out of touch on domestic work.
I would still suggest starting off with a series of small commissions where you agree that for a fixed fee (with a simple agreement to revise this in the result of changes) they then develop a scheme with you, then when you sign it off to take it forwards to planning.

agreeing fixed packages will still be based on 15% or whatever and the fee is usually split to these work stages anyway. Fixed lump sum fee for first phases design,planning, building regs etc is the usual route and then take it from there. But its better to engage with a professional team you can build a relationship with from the start.

Budgetwise I'd go for £1000/sqm as an absolute minimum to £2000/sqm for high spec. But it could be higher still depending on your aspirations.

you're best bet is to meet a couple of architects initially a to get an idea of all thats involved and likely costs or look on architecture.com for client guides.

From past experience, write out a very precise list of what you want the architect to do - size, boundaries etc maybe with sketches or pics of houses with similar features.

I was involved with an extension plane once and what was requested and agreed verbally bore no resemblance to what the guy came up with on the plans. It was only an extension, to reach to the building line, but he drew it way too short and did the roof differently to how we had requested it, then claimed it was what he was asked to do and billed hundreds for what were useless plans, but we had no proof of what we had asked for (oh stupid us!).

Yup, all architects are useless, at least that's what most of my clients say - but then they come back for more!

Architects fees?

Probably more than you're willing to pay and less than the architect is worth. 😉

The hardest bit of an architects job is managing client expectations as they so often don't fully comprehend what they are undertaking or exactly what is involved. The process will be a fraught one and you'll curse your architect to high heaven and back but the end result will probably be something you are very pleased with and worth all the fuss.

architects don't know as much as they should!

🙄

Budgetwise I'd go for £1000/sqm as an absolute minimum to £2000/sqm for high spec. But it could be higher still depending on your aspirations.

Blimey! I know thats what a lot of houses cost, but I keep seeing sub £1k/m2 houses, that meet some fab standards of efficiency and health...It *can* be done.

I think that aP is right on agreeing a package / break down the job.

And again, get an architect you have an affinity with / think you can work with - its tough, and you WILL have a disagreement! I have a client at present on site with a self build and it is just argument after argument - the client thinks X and the architect wants Y, and neither are prepared to comprimise...(I have to say, that architect is a c*ck)

I have some recomendations around Yorkshire/Notts/Lincolnshire/Manc/Leeds/Sheffield if you like

architects don't know as much as they should!

Despite not being an architect, and spending half my day 'educating' architects, I have to defend them....

They are expected to do soooo much on a project, have massive variety of skills and knowledge, and do everything from project manage to specify the taps....They are also trained (usually) as an arts degree, compared with the continent where it is a science degree. The Euros build better houses (technically and performance wise), we build better looking and better functioning buildings... I think that architects (like planners and building control) are easy targets in a tough, complex business, and rather than slagging them off we ought to push forward understanding through education and assistance.

My experience with architects is not good but limited. The one working for me I gave him detailed sketches of what I wanted and what he produced was very different. My parents had an architect for an extension who put no lights at one end at all and the other end the lights could not be changed without a scaffold tower! Less said about the one supervising the renovation of my building the better! Amongst other stupidities he has tried to spec upvc windows on a listed building.

My advice would be to make sure the architect you use is someone who you get on with - the personal relationship is the most important thing.

AS for fees - it depends what you want. Planning application only? Fully spoeced detailed drawings to your design? total design including all building warrant applications and structural survey ( structural engineers are another story - a pal had a structural engineer tell him a wall was a supporting wall when it was not - we ripped the ceiling down to prove to the engineer that there was nothing above it}

I don't know if my experience is a fair representation of the profession and I fully accept Matts comments above but go with someone you trust, get everything in writing and check the plans carefully. Learn as much as you can to help you understand.

They are also trained (usually) as an arts degree, compared with the continent where it is a science degree. The Euros build better houses (technically and performance wise), we build better looking and better functioning buildings

I'm not being an arse but that comment is just plain rubbish. We'd build much better buildings in the UK if people were willing to invest more in the built environment and the red tape and regulations were overhauled. The actual construction process is adversarial rather than co-operative and the quality of what gets produced really suffers as a result. where the architect went to school has very little to do with it.

As others have said, be very clear about what you want. But the most important thing is don't change your mind to late into the project, especially once it has started on site.

Sit and read the drawings very very carefully. If you don't understand, ask them to explain it again or ask someone else. You really wouldn't believe the number of clients that want to move walls once the foundations are already in.

I'm not involved in much domestic work at the moment, but do work on 15% of total build cost for all consultant fees - you should get that with the current market as all Architects are suffering so undercutting each other.

You'll need to add on a bit extra for Planning, etc, and make sure you have a healthy contingency - you will spend it. On the subject of planning, you can pop into your local planning office and see a duty planner to get informal advice such as likelihood of permission being granted and specific restrictions that might be imposed.

Blimey! I know thats what a lot of houses cost, but I keep seeing sub £1k/m2 houses, that meet some fab standards of efficiency and health...It *can* be done.

show me these houses sir are they self-build?

Despite not being an architect, and spending half my day 'educating' architects, I have to defend them....

a little patronising but i like your style, whatdo you do?

I'm not involved in much domestic work at the moment, but do work on 15% of total build cost for all consultant fees - you should get that with the current market as all Architects are suffering so undercutting each other.

no we're not and i should remind you that the addage 'buy cheap buy twice' works for professional fees as much as it does for bikes

The quality of the builder has a lot to do with the poor state of our buildings. On the Continent they work to tollerances of a couple of mm's, here it's measured in inches.

However, as with any trade, there are some good and some bad Architects.

If you're in the Yorkshire area, I can recommend one to you.

'push forward understanding through education and assistance.'

*spits coffee over keyboard* i've never known any architects to do this.

despite dealing with planners regularly they seem to have little grasp of what planners actually require and much less what their clients want.

my recommendations:

1) meet as many as you can stomach to discuss requirements. pick the one most up his own arse. it will be very tough call but he'll probably be the best. the normal ones are generally quite crap. ok if you want a barratt house but bugger all use for anything else. alternativly pick the one that knows the planner personally.

2) keep it professional and write to confirm everything. twice. in bold type. and keep a copy.

3) make sure you know what you want before you start. double check this! do you really want curvy walls and a sauna in your extension or has the architectural power of suggestion got to you? the architect will push the boundaries of what you want hard to get what *he* wants.

4) be prepared to say no. dont give him any slack. he's theere to flesh out your requiremeents not be on the next grandd designs 9unless you want to be)

5) fix a budget and tell the architect you have about half of this to spend. only then will you have a fuighting chance to come in on budget. if you let slip the full amount you'll be met with a quiet smile and a new plan full of exotic bullshit furnushings or an extension made of structural glass.

i love architects. they keep me on my toes, oh, and employed.

no we're not and i should remind you that the addage 'buy cheap buy twice' works for professional fees as much as it does for bikes

Well, we've been undercut in several recent tenders by significant amounts, even when we've come in well under the guide budget, but that is in different sectors that are supposedly not being hit by the financial situation.

thats hard, i'm not saying it doesn't happen but if everybody went down that route we'd all be screwed like the eighties. the people that suffer are clients because if you buy work you generally don't apply the same resources and the end result isn't there. ie you get what you pay for.

OK, so it was masterplanning work, but we pitched at £95k, budget was £100k, and it was awarded to a pratice that tendered at £60k!

Understandable when even large practices are laying off 25% or so of their employees.

despite dealing with planners regularly they seem to have little grasp of what planners actually require and much less what their clients want.

Planners are another of the big problems with building in the UK! 😉

I'm still amazed that there's people charging 15% for a new build house.

We've been undercut on a tender by 50% and we thought we were pretty keen. Fortunately this client knows how to analyse prices and ruled them out for not being able to resource the job properly.

Ah a subject dear to my heart at the moment. My first genuine question which my architect couldn't actually answer is - why does the construction cost of my house/renovation bear any connection to the design cost. Thats like my company quoting a IT build design job based on the cost of the hardware - doesn;t really make sense to me. Surely to design X will take Y hours @ Z rate therefore a total is reached. Of course the size of the job would be the 'scope' but that shouldn;t be linked to the fact that steel has gone up 25%, concrete has gone up 185 etc - weird.
We've agreed fixed price segments of work but as a business owner I too can use excel and can see that its the %age cost broken down into little bits with a nice NZIAA clause that says "Fixed price means nothing really and we can change that on a whim".

Can you sense I am a little frustrated with our architect ?

And what Van Halen said is all correct. Mine seems to have taken our written, detailed brief (covers sizes, dimensions, materials, construction methods etc - my wife is an engineer) and designed something that they would like to live in. We went back with the X-ref the brief and it was like they had never even read it - so we're witholding $11K in fees at the moment which is something they are quite shocked about. But in professional terms they have no comeback, the job has not met the specification therefore under their own contract they don;t get paid. Its interesting but they said that they have never been managed by a client like that, they normally just do what they want - their words not mine ! And this is not a small company either. Bizarre.

Anyway, i'm sure at the end of the day it will be lovely. But FFS write down everything you want in triplicate, document phonecalls with back emails etc, send them signed letters blah blah blah

Architects are weird - they charge a fortune, yet they fail to understand really basic things.

My favourite bugbear, is toilets. Architects routinely specify the same size for ladies and mens toilets, when absolutely everyone knows that men spend way less time on the loo than women. Like if you go to St Pancras station, there is always a queue of about 100 people running out of the ladies loos, and no queue for the mens. Surely at some point, some architecture academic could have gone to a train station (or a pub, a club, a theatre, a sports stadium, or pretty much anywhere open to the public), worked out that they were all doing this wrong and that maybe it'd make sense to make more cubicles in the ladies than in the gents, and passed this on to their students at some point during the ridiculously long qualification process?

Joe

I'm always slightly puzzled by the role of an architect and why people use them on things as small as an extension, I'd be genuinely interested to hear. Sure if you're building a shopping centre their arts side is probably helpful in creating the feel and shape of a building but an extension is just an extension, I know dozens of people (ok, 5 or 6) who have drawn up and built their own extensions without need for an architect. I know what shape I want it, I know how I want it detailing (usually to match the existing house) and I know how I want the interior to look, where I want fittings and fixtures and how I'll install them. Assuming I can do detailed scale drawings of what I want and I've some clue of how things are constructed, where's the need for one?

[i]Architects routinely specify the same size for ladies and mens toilets[/i]

Do they? All the projects I work on must be non-routine then.

I think that you'll find that sanitary provision in buildings is covered by BS 6465-1:2006, and the other thing you'll find is that clients won't pay for more than they're obliged to provide.

Anyway might I suggest that the IT people explain [url= http://dizzythinks.net/2007/05/it-project-overspend-of-day.html ][b]this[/b][/url]

I'm not being an arse but that comment is just plain rubbish. We'd build much better buildings in the UK if people were willing to invest more in the built environment and the red tape and regulations were overhauled.

I disagree on some points - money is NOT the answer (but it helps and we should spend more). We as a business are regularly delivering higher (thermal, comfort and health) performance, for lower cost. How come Germany, Austria, Switzerland (heck, even FRANCE!) can build better performing homes, with higher wages, for less per m2?
.
Changing HOW we build is, and the building regs need to be overhauled and enforced. I am talking specifications, materials and systems, labour and contractual arrangements etc.
.

The actual construction process is adversarial rather than co-operative and the quality of what gets produced really suffers as a result.

Totally agree with this - ever seen the [url= http://www.contractjournal.com/blogs/the-foreman-blog/2008/09/the-foremans-constructasaurus.html ]Constructasuarus?[/url]
Having been on the German and Swiss sites, you can see how different their approach is - and some of it is simple basic stuff...(Like stop subbying out, and stop choosing the lowest initial quote!)

where the architect went to school has very little to do with it.

Its not about which university - its about how we teach architecture across the UK IMO. It is an arts degree, and much of the focus is (rightly) good design - but mainly aesthetically IMHO. We need a move to more science/engineering/ecological(biology) led design - hand in hand with the good aesthetics....

I DAILY have to assist and educate design teams and architects, as well as M&E, structural, planners about the BASICS of sustainability, thermal performance and response, strategy etc etc. I speak to architects on a daily basis, and assist with design alterations / performance specs / strategy on live projects every week.
.
I (fortnightly or so) have a design done to PassivHaus standard land on my desk - and I reckon at least 50% would barely scrape a good pass for thermal performance at basic UK building regs. Now some of this is to do with SAP vs PHPP vs 'real life' - but a lot is the basics of thermal performance and detailing - and 80% of the architects have no idea of what I start speaking to them about. It gets worse as you get to 'normal' buildings.
.
50% of our buildings FAIL uk building regs on thermal performance, let alone other issues. A lot are to do with construction and the tender/build process, but many are poor design, poor/UK 'type' construction systems and appalling 'standard details' - a lot of which comes down to specification and design.
.
I speak regularly on topics like this - last week was housing associations, this week was building control, planners and architects, next week is architects at EcoBuild in London, week after a load more LEA architects etc etc. I and my boss are involved in the CSH review (he chairs it!), and the building regs review, and I and one of our technical guys are also involved in the SAP review, one of our peeps is writing the new water regs/CSH stuff, I assist in a government sponsored research program into alternative construction / insulation systems. We know what we are talking about.

(oh look, another 'carbon neutral' house just landed on the email....)

PS, I have same gripe with M&E, structural, planners, building control, builders, subbies etc etc etc

😆

nice to see you have no gripe with us civil engineers.

then again you`ve probably just forgotten we exist. as to most of the design teams and clients...

*sobs*

planners are generally not the problem (dont get me wrong some of them are so wet they might as well be fish) its the 80yr old commitee members who think the wheel is a modern development that you get problems with.

then you get places like lewes where you get riots if you propose anything sustainable.

coffeeking. you are right. for an extension i wouldnt use an architect. for something bigger you need one to agonise over the architrave colour and window details. actually making a development look pretty is a small part of their job and often curtailed by the planning process. (or in brighton copied from the job next door - just look at the station developments. soooo dull!)

Matt - what day are you at Ecobuild?

All week 8)

It is funny, I am a planner and seeing people bitch and moan about what we do, if someone wanted to put up a huge replacemnt dwelling which would loom over their house, I don't think they would be singing the same tune!!

As for architects, they don't know as much as they should, I am surprised by it sometines as they should have a better knowledge of the planning system.

Ok - I'll pop round and say hello at some point then

Thats the problem Loddrick - we all expect architects to know EVERYTHING about EVERYTHING in a complex industry....

Its a bit like expecting a GP to understand in detail Hematology issues.

Its not about which university - its about how we teach architecture across the UK IMO. It is an arts degree, and much of the focus is (rightly) good design - but mainly aesthetically IMHO. We need a move to more science/engineering/ecological(biology) led design - hand in hand with the good aesthetics....

I'm sorry - this is misinformed and unfounded nonsense. Have you any experience of an architectural education? Any student who made a design decision because it looked good or they wanted to make a beautiful building would be failed.

Also you can actually get either a Bachelors or a Bsc in architecture.

Thats the problem Loddrick - we all expect architects to know EVERYTHING about EVERYTHING in a complex industry....

You are making assumptions, at the very least, architects should have a sound knowledge of PD legislation, and hopw proposals may relate to amenity of neighbouring properties, or to advise clients that a 6 bedroom mansion in the green belt & AONB is not going to get permission,

but then they would be out of pocket if they did that wouldn't they....

I'd be surprised if any of the architects I know would run with something like that. I'm so glad I don't do domestic work - I pass it all on to 3 friends in turn.

I'm sorry - this is misinformed and unfounded nonsense. Have you any experience of an architectural education?

Yes - brother is architect, brother in law is architect - and speaking to lots of them...

coffeeking. you are right. for an extension i wouldnt use an architect. for something bigger you need one to agonise over the architrave colour and window details. actually making a development look pretty is a small part of their job and often curtailed by the planning process. (or in brighton copied from the job next door - just look at the station developments. soooo dull!)

So what IS their job then? I know a few civil engineers (mainly work on industrial/commercial stuff) and they seem to be doing a large amount of stuff that I hear architects are meant to be doing, or at least it seems as though the architects say "it should look like this" and the eng's say "ok, this is how we make it and these are the required standards", but it seems to me that a civil eng could do the whole process as they already know the standards/fittings/requirements although they may lack the "arty" side. And if the arty side is flattened by planning people, what good are architects?

As I say, I know nothing of their work so it's probably a completely unfair view, but I wouldnt expect an architect to design my beam thicknesses and I feel fairly confident I could draw up someting nice that fits within planning laws and looks nice (on a small scale!) - so......?

The only experience I have of architects is walking round an open day for architecture students, looking at them talking about how gasometers are the heart of the city and how buildings should communicate with the heartbeat of the gasometers. At that point I found it all too artsy and left, passing the rather ace little models of buildings made painstakingly out of layers of card but really being nothing but sculptures?

I dunno, they must do something worth the cash their paid, someone help me out!

coffeeking - I think the problem you have is in your head. You come accross as a more mechanical rather than aesthetical type of person. A Civil or Structural Engineer is able to tell you how big a beam needs to be above a room but they won't know how big the room is needed to be below it for the room to work.

imo, good design should never be 'seen' and go un-noticed - just like godd service in a bar or restaurant.

In reality a project needs experienced input from all Professional parties to make it success. Scale down the size of the project and people start to take on multiple roles.

To put it another way, I don't know what a Heart Surgeon does. But I know that you come out with a different heart.

As for the OP - I read your post to be that it is something you are at the preliminary stages, of considering, perhaps doing this. I which case you'll need to over estimate things rather than start economising. Afterall, do you really want to build a 'dream house' only to be £20k short when it's time to start decorating?

[i]Any student who made a design decision because it looked good or they wanted to make a beautiful building would be failed.
[/i]

So you're saying studying doesn't prepare architects for how they'll act when they're practicing?

🙂

Pedantry mode

'Also you can actually get either a Bachelors or a [u]Bsc[/u] in architecture'

A [u]BSc[/u] is a Bachelor of Science. A [u]BA[/u] is a Bachelor of Arts. An [u]MB[/u] is a Bachelor of Medicine. All are Bachelor's.

coffeeking - I think the problem you have is in your head. You come accross as a more mechanical rather than aesthetical type of person. A Civil or Structural Engineer is able to tell you how big a beam needs to be above a room but they won't know how big the room is needed to be below it for the room to work.

imo, good design should never be 'seen' and go un-noticed - just like godd service in a bar or restaurant.

I am definitely more mechanical, I take function over form any day, but I know an eyesore when I see one too, and I can appreciate a nice design of building. I disagree that the civil eng wouldnt know how big the room needs to be, especially on something as minimal as a house design - they're experienced intelligent people who can assess sizes and spaces and imagine how things look in 3D very easily? They're more than capable of understanding building use etc? IS it civil eng's or architects that are making newbuilds the size of a kids shoebox with a postage stamp garden? I suppose its the same argument with say designing a laptop - you'd have a designer draw up the shape and positions etc but an engineer would figure out how that should be done and I dont really argue with that so I'm not sure why I have a confusion with architects.

[Sticks head in]

<looks at aP>

[/leaves]

So you're saying studying doesn't prepare architects for how they'll act when they're practicing?

I'm saying to justify a design decision by saying 'because it looks good' doesn't cut it in architecture school.

What an individual chooses to do when they get out of school however...

Pedantry mode

'Also you can actually get either a Bachelors or a Bsc in architecture'

A BSc is a Bachelor in Science. A BA is a Bachelor in Arts both are Bachelor's

*hangs head in shame*

Coffeeking,

No, I wouldn't expect a CE or an SE to know what size a room needs to be. That's not their training or expertise - and I'd be very wary of any Professional claiming to be an expert of an element out side their specialism. Additionally, I wouldn't give them that task (or design risk) to undertake. That's not to say they don't know or they could never learn it.

I can calculate beam sizes etc... but I don't have the PI to undertake that work Professionally.

Going back to the medical example. If you were have a heart transplant would you want the Heart Surgeon worrying whether your anesthetic is still working or would you want an Anesthesiologist there doing the job. What about making sure the equipments sterile? That'll be one of the Nurses then.

Successful design depends on lots of jobs being completed and teamwork. You don't need to understand what each member does to benefit from the end result.

[i]I disagree that the civil eng wouldnt know how big the room needs to be[/i]

I don't, and I'm a civil engineer.

IS it civil eng's or architects that are making newbuilds the size of a kids shoebox with a postage stamp garden?

I think it might be the Developers.

To lighten the tone, my favourite joke about engineers 😉

Three engineers are sitting around over a beer, arguing about what type of engineer was in charge of the design of the human body.

The electrical engineer believed that the human body was obviously designed by an electrical engineer, because the nervous system acts as a communication system and control system, and the brain is the best computer ever invented. The mechanical engineer thought that was fine as far as it went, but the body couldn't manage without the complex mechanisms which made up the arms, legs, trunk etc. But in the end, they were persuaded that a civil engineer must have been in charge - because only a civil engineer would run a waste pipeline through the middle of a recreational area...

No, I wouldn't expect a CE or an SE to know what size a room needs to be. That's not their training or expertise - and I'd be very wary of any Professional claiming to be an expert of an element out side their specialism. Additionally, I wouldn't give them that task (or design risk) to undertake. That's not to say they don't know or they could never learn it.

If you're looking at it from a commercial point of view I suppose, but looking at it from a self-build situation you're going to be fairly aware of your space requirements yourself. I mean from my own point of view (as someone considering a self-build), if I were commissioning my own house from scratch I'd know where I wanted things, how I wanted them aligned and sized etc - I'd have done those calculations and drawings myself in the first place, I'd have spoken to the planners and checked these ideas were OK - what does the architect actually do, other than draw it up? AFAIK its the engineer that checks levels/drainage/structures etc. Are their primary use for people who perfectly rightly just want to say "I want a house of this size and style here please, design it for me"?

I'm not sure the CE/Architect setup works with the medical analogy - you dont legally need to have an architect on a build - if the design is crap but it passes planning and building regs you're fine, whereas you legally would require a trained anesthesiologist for an operation to occur.

Obviously I'm looking at this from the point of view of a self build, one off, rather than commercial ventures where accountability lies other than with the customer.

I don't, and I'm a civil engineer.

So its you designing Barratt homes then? 😉 There are no hard and fast rules on room size so ultimately it is down to what the client wants?

i guess we only hear the stories of when architects cock up because they don't understand the engineering side of things. like the eco-friendly renovation with a massive water tank that was part of a solar panel-thermal water heating system. a failure to understand how big the tank was going to be for a given number of liters and a failure to understand how heavy water is.

no we can't just move it to there where you have re-drawn it.

i'm sure they get it right sometimes. perhaps they listen to what the structural engineer has to say.

There are no hard and fast rules on room size so ultimately it is down to what the client wants?

There are minimum standards but I think these might only apply to homes built using public funds, unless there are specific planning requirements for that particular site.

So yes, it is down to the client or rather developer, and if people keep on buying those houses then the developer will keep on building them.

Dont get me wrong, despite the jovial artist/engineer banter I am sure they MUST do a useful job or else they'd not get paid and that part of the work woudl be shifted into someone elses domain. Its just you dont really, as a member of the public, get to see what they do and appreciate it fully.

AFAIK pretty much the only housing providers stating that there are minimum space standards are Housing Associations, as far as the more commercial ones they'll have worked out on a square metre basis exactly what they're prepared to provide for the market that they're aiming for.

architects are there to do to all the pissy things that engineers cant face doing specifying wall finishes/ internal insulation/ tiling/ kitchens/ bathrooms/ window and glass etc etc.

sod that! i just want to play man lego and build things.

for a simple house extension its easy and there are loads of structural engineers that can do you an extension, drawings, specs the lot. hell, even i've done them!

architects seem to have very limited concept of how structures work. i'd not expect them to be able to design stuff but realising that columns and walls ideally have to go one on top of the other floor to floor would help tremendously.

then again if an engineer designed a house it'll be crap as it would be square and boring. simple to build and cheap but very dull. you need a bit of madness to get decent buildings.

i could tell you what size a room needs to be as i've been asked the question by an architect and i looked it up. i can also tell you about all the planning legisllation you need to comply with. i'm a civil engineer and get paid f-all but seem to spend all my time sorting out planning applications that architects balls up. bitter - me? nooo...

van-halen - strangely enough I spend a lot of time working [i]with[/i] engineers helping them to not balls things up.
One of the biggest problems is that engineers will say that a room only needs to be exactly the size it needs to be right now - but when you're designing buildings with a minimum 120 year design life you'd think that building in a little flexibility might be a good thing.

Pedantry mode

'Also you can actually get either a Bachelors or a Bsc in architecture'

A BSc is a Bachelor of Science. A BA is a Bachelor of Arts. An MB is a Bachelor of Medicine. All are Bachelor's.

Just to clear up.

To be an architect - you have to complete a 3 part RIBA assement - the university courses are approved to cover these 3 parts.

The majority or Architecture schools in the country offer a BSc (Hons) Arch course which covers part 1. then you do a year or so in practice, and back to uni for a BA or MA depending on the uni which covers your Part 2 assessment. then after another years in practice you can work towards your part 3 assessment, which on completion you can become a chartered architect.

And at the uni went to the prof later said, think i was in 3rd year at that point, that they considered the course (BSc Arch) was a study of architecture... ie the study of design/art/concepts rather than a vocational course to train you to be Architects. I'd got smegged off with the attitude there and left, and have switch slightly in that the role i've more turned to is that of Architectural Techinician.

If i may - coffeeking, your oppinion is the same as alot of client - 'well all you do is draw some pictures, why does it cost so much?'

Architects come in many types - so its important to talk to several and get a feel for them, see if they match what your after.

there are architects that are aposutly brilliant designers - but havent the first clue about how to put it together, it comes to use to do that and turn their back of fag packet sketches into something that can be built, and theres those that for the domestic work can do everything from the design (inc getting planning permission and building control approval) through the M&E and structural engineering work, and be your planning supervisor on the job.

My own practice would be no good for you - we specalise in historic buildings - churches especially. tho we have a very good forensic dept, so if anything goes wrong with your build we have specalists that can act as your expert witness. 🙂

us engineers (especially the structural variety) like things in straight lines. this doesnt normally sit well with our artistic brethren and their curvy features. there is a happy medium somewhere between the 2 schools but it does mean we blame each other for each others problems. 😀

at the end of teh day we have to say you cant build what you want (be it practical or cost based reason) and you push the boundaries of what we think we can design and make us think really hard.

i've found it promotes a healthy working loathing!

its all good fun tho and its nice to know were keeping each other in work! 😉

Lord Summerisle - whereabouts are you based? I am having real difficulties with the council appointed architect who is supervising the restoration of the listed building under statutory notice of which I own a part - and someone with forensic expertise in this area will be needed at some point. He has done stuff such as rerouting soil stacks and remodelling windows without listed building consent and has wanted to spec uPVC windows on the building. Some of the more stupid stuff I have got corrected by getting historic scotland involved as they are grant aiding the work.I am based in Edinburgh.

If its the sort of thing you can help with please e mail me on jeremyDOTpascoeATbtinternetDOTcom

Ta muchly

TJ, We're based in Manchester, Chester, Leeds and Sheffield but do work certainly through out England and Wales - dont know about Scotland

I'll have a word with my collegues in Forensic on monday, see if we can help you.

TJ - we have an associated practice which has a specialism in conservation in Edinburgh - I'll email you.
I might be up there towards the end of April

Cheers Ap - that would be cool.

You can show me where the good pubs are in April then.

OK I'll chime in with my 2 cents worth. Architects do come in a great variety of abilities and talent just like every profession (some are quite poor I admit) however the best ones can contribute a quality to a project that is hard to put in words. These projects can be anything from a house extension to large public building. Architecture is far more than getting the size of the room right or chosing the wallpaper it is achieving a space and form that has an almost intangible 'rightness' and beauty to it. It is influenced by all sorts of difficult to get right things such as the proportions of a space (height, width and length) how the light comes in at different times of the day and year, how you move through it, the materials, textures, colours, acoustics, smell, tectonics, the framing of views inside and out, etc, etc, etc. A truely great building and space can be uplifting to the spirit. All a bit airy fairy to some perhaps but a good architect can deliver this and in my experience no other profession is trained to do so.
Its easy to say my Architect was crap because of ..... (insert story here) but they are one of the very few generalist professions left. They have to have an at least working knowledge (or should have) of law, engineering, construction, psychology, planning, aesthetics, available products,..... very hard to get it all perfect.
Sorry for the long rant and yes I am an Architect.

As an update to my building woes - i now have pricing back from my builder...and to build what hey have designed is 120K more than my top budget which the architect used to price the job. The scopes the same. What do i do now ? I can;t afford that, as far as I am concerned the design is too expensive for the budget, but they knoew the budget at the start. Bizarre. Oh well, anyone want to buy a house with a set of totally unrealistic extension plans ?

Being a recently qualified architect myself, i believe i can speak from a point of some experience. all be it admittedly slightly limited. as far as fee's go, it really depends on what the contract and agreement between client and architect and how much they are expected to do. as a rough guide it probably should be somewhere between 3 and 5% of build cost. keep in mind that this fee is not just the salary and cost of what ever architects work on the project but also has to cover overheads and provide the architect firm with a profit. salary and fee wise, compared to other professions that study for similar lengths such as lawyer or doctors, architects on average earn and charge a lot less. We study a BA for 3 years, then a year working in an architects, then a 2 year Diploma that we can then do a 1 year masters, followed by at least 1 more year working as an assistant architect, then our part 3 exams and interviews with external examiners!

Education wise, i do agree that an architects education is too biased to the artistic aspects than technical, thou the technical aspects are included in the course and are vital to the final portfolio. people should also remember that an architect has to have good knowledge of all aspects of a construction project and be involved from planning regs and applications, to structural details, to specifying insulation or door handles, not too mention that they are held responsible and liable for a huge amount of the process and result long after the end of construction.

Thou is it obviously true that there are bad architects out there, as with any profession, the good ones should have open communication with the client and act in the clients best interests. And as for the gripe about toilet specification? we have to adhere to building regs, planning laws and client requests that specify the toilet numbers to us, over which we have little choice.

I know this is a bit of a rant and sorry for that, but felt i needed to at least shed some light, all be it, biased, on the subject. Also please dont think that i think planners, engineers, QS's, builders etc are not important because obviously their specialised knowledge is vital to a successful project.