Using an architect - am I taking the right approach?

[Dippy]

I am just starting on a project to extend my house and make some alterations. I think the two-storey extension is probably nothing special, but the whole scope of work includes some remodelling of internal walls, moving the utility room and refitting the bathrooms. Although I believe that I could manage this myself with the help of someone for the drawings, I have absolutely no experience (apart from DIY) and so I am going to be sensible and get proper professional services.

I have had one architect around (a personal recommendation), and took the approach of telling him what we needed (i.e. more room here and there) rather than being specific on what we wanted to do, even though I have a good idea what I want to do. This is because without the experience, I can imagine that my ideas might not account for unforseen problems and we'd have to start again.

I have had the architect's quote in and it is higher than I expected (based on some of the web searching I had done). Living in Berkshire I expect to have to pay higher prices, but of course it's making me want to check my approach. Of course I'm going to get some more quotes, but I would like to get some feedback on if I am approaching this right, hence this post.

I guess I am trying to take a low-risk approach and I do accept that I'll have to pay more for it. The question I need feedback on is if I pay an architect a few grand more than I need to, will it really make the difference I am hoping for, or am I kidding myself?

P.S. part of my dilemma is that I am a professional project manager (IT, not building) so whereas my wife is happy to pay an architect extra for that (maybe perceived) confidence, I feel the need to have some sort of "proof".

 

[Static]

Get an architectural technician to do the plans and getting planning etc. The are basically the same but dont have the full architectural qualifications and thus cheaper. Also check if engineers/planning/building control fees are included in quote as they can add up to ££££

 

[Swiss Tony]

I do the drawings for just that type of work for £300 a time. Don't live anywhere near you though so not touting for work!

An Architect will maybe give you some design ideas which will look nice, but you can get them yourself by looking in magazines and other houses.

Look in your local paper for 'plan drawing Service' Then you pay for just getting the drawings done and passed by the council.

If your looking to spend a couple of thousand to get this service, then I may be able to make it to berkshire!

 

[Swiss Tony]

To elaborate:

Building Regs Submission £300
Building regs Fees usually £130

Planning Application £300
Planning Fee £135.

Architect designs a scheme
Architectural Technician makes it work and redesigns it when it doesn't. (Often)

 

[Basecoat]

I am just starting on a project to extend my house and make some alterations. I think the two-storey extension is probably nothing special, but the whole scope of work includes some remodelling of internal walls, moving the utility room and refitting the bathrooms. Although I believe that I could manage this myself with the help of someone for the drawings, I have absolutely no experience (apart from DIY) and so I am going to be sensible and get proper professional services.

I have had one architect around (a personal recommendation), and took the approach of telling him what we needed (i.e. more room here and there) rather than being specific on what we wanted to do, even though I have a good idea what I want to do. This is because without the experience, I can imagine that my ideas might not account for unforseen problems and we'd have to start again.

I have had the architect's quote in and it is higher than I expected (based on some of the web searching I had done). Living in Berkshire I expect to have to pay higher prices, but of course it's making me want to check my approach. Of course I'm going to get some more quotes, but I would like to get some feedback on if I am approaching this right, hence this post.

I guess I am trying to take a low-risk approach and I do accept that I'll have to pay more for it. The question I need feedback on is if I pay an architect a few grand more than I need to, will it really make the difference I am hoping for, or am I kidding myself?

P.S. part of my dilemma is that I am a professional project manager (IT, not building) so whereas my wife is happy to pay an architect extra for that (maybe perceived) confidence, I feel the need to have some sort of "proof".

Hi "Dippy"

Get a good architect to draw your plans. I did mine myself but got a remote architect to check them and print plans for me. Although planning passed them then I got sting by building regs. I have had to pay additional £180 to another architect who put mistakes right and did necessary calcs. I have had this new architect out a couple of times to help me avoid pitfalls. It pays to get a good architect from start. You will be miles better off.

 

[Dippy]

Thanks for the replies.

I got a second architect around and he seemed much like the first. His quote came in as an estimate of the work (higher than I had estimated), with a statement that his fees would be 11%.

Then the third came around and he was much less "designer" and more "technical". He gave me his hourly rate and estimated the hours to do the work - about a third of the other two guys.

I have a fourth coming round next week who is a surveyor instead of an architect, and I expect him to be similar.

I now realise that the answer to my question is definitely "no". I feel much more comfortable dealing with the third guy, not only because he will be cheaper, but because it will give me more control. Sure I will need to be more involved, but then the fact that I'm on this forum shows that that's the sort of person I am!

 

[Static]

If you go for the hourly rate then ask for a fixed maximum cost. Then you can have a capped figure around what the other architects were charging.