architect price

mendel

Folks, we have arranged to meet an architect for preliminary discussion re renovation plans.
We have just been told by someone that this particular architect quoted them 17k for plans and planning application for one off house? tell me this can't be right?

Pudz21

Mendal,

That is very very expensive, we are applying for planning at the moment for a one off house in Offaly and have an amazing architect and only paying a fraction on 17k.
In my opinion architects get over paid for what they actually do.

Let me know how you get on and if you want my guy's details get in touch.

sinnerboy

Typically expect - from start to finish ( when builder is finished )

10% of build cost

Build cost estimate* €1500-2000 / m2 ( varies depending on location )

The architects fee is usually split into 3 equal parts - along these lines

1/3 - at planning

1/3 - when building starts

1/3 - when building finishes

*Construction costs are falling - and as a result so are fees

So that fee of €17k may apply to a build cost between €250k ~ €340k .

Wonky Knees

My experience is as above 1/3 a 1/3 and a 1/3. A percentage of the construction cost was never discussed. Mine is not a one off, but is 2000 square foot to the front side and back - so lots of work for the architect. I asked for an overall cost and then did a deal. OP should shop around.

As an aside, I also paid a fraction of the architects fee for an engineer. That guy did a ton of work. Two best decisions I made was to hire an engineer and without doubt a QS. Small money, big savings.

donal1981

I have an architect that I am very happy with (Galway location)
I quoted 5 different local architects and he was also the best price for my self build. PM me if you want his details.

To the original poster - 17K is ridiculous price.

Know exactly what you want before you go to them. Perhaps they could throw in BER cert, or sign off on your stage payments as well?

muffler

My opinion will always differ from anyone along the East coast (hi SB ) but that figure is a complete rip off. Shop around for other prices.

Its no wonder the country is in the mess its in when people can attempt to charge a fee like that.

Poor Uncle Tom

I think that price of €17,000 is fairytale stuff. The bread and butter work you describe should cost in the region of €3,500 for 250m2 design at planning stage, €2,500 before build starts after tender and contracts and €2,000 on handover of the Certificate of Compliance, imo.

mendel

ok, i'm back from the meeting

quote is 6000 for plans to planning stage and 6000 for construction drawings and associated checks during build. indepth survey required on this building as it is a renovation project of circa 2500 sq ft. i would say a lot of work for the architect.

We will also need an engineer during build.

I just wanted to update you. we will be using this person (for personal reasons.)

donal1981

It might be a lot more complicated job than I understand, but those figures still sound high unless you are planning on spending over 120K on the renovation.


Also I am surprised the architect is also not the project engineer for that money.

icbarros

I think the 17k fee is quite reasonable if includes all stages (sketch design, detailed design/planning application, working drawings/tender and construction administration).
Any architect charging less than that is either doing it as a nixer/not paying tax or getting paid the equivalent to the minimum wage.
If you take the minimum of 20% for income tax (which can go up to 41%), plus PRSI 5%, all the architect is getting is €12,750. And that is before he takes out overhead expenses (like insurance, etc) and considering he's paying the less tax possible (20%).

I agree with sinnerboy above when he says 10% of building cost is normal practice but nowdays this is more likely to be 8% if not 6%, anything below that is not even recommended by RIAI because the architect is expected to have a loss instead of profit.

In relation to what muffler mentions I think if the country is a mess is because people don't want to pay architects to make good architectural designs and they prefer to save money with professionals that are not qualified to do architecture and destroy the built environment where we live.

There is a great lack of architectural education in the general population but that's a different discussion and hopefully it will change with the new policies that are supposed to get in place soon. Saying that architects are overpaid for what they do is not understanding the architectural process, its implications and responsibilities.

Wonky Knees

Sorry 17K is off the wall for what the OP is getting. OP, don't be put off by the fact that you are renovating. I'm surprised with the two stage payment. If this is the case I would "without a doubt" make sure you hold back money until after the build has been done and the architect has reviewed the snag.

12K is ball park but does this include the Engineer? I doubt it.

Wonky Knees

icbarros wrote: »

Any architect charging less than that is either doing it as a nixer/not paying tax or getting paid the equivalent to the minimum wage.
If you take the minimum of 20% for income tax (which can go up to 41%), plus PRSI 5%, all the architect is getting is €12,750. And that is before he takes out overhead expenses (like insurance, etc) and considering he's paying the less tax possible (20%).

Again I have to disagree. It's not the job of the OP to worry about the tax affairs of the Architect. And besides, any architect I know (still in the business) is actually very busy. Extensions are popping up ever-where! My architect has 11 jobs on at the moment and more coming in. Yes, yes, yes, there are architects struggling but it is stretching to think that architects will only get a handful of jobs a year even in this environment.

Wonky Knees

icbarros wrote: »

I agree with sinnerboy above when he says 10% of building cost is normal practice but nowdays this is more likely to be 8% if not 6%, anything below that is not even recommended by RIAI because the architect is expected to have a loss instead of profit.

My opinion is that 'normal practice' got us into the mess we are in and is responsible for ripping off a generation of people. I was quoted 10% three years ago for a renovation in Dublin. When I told the architect that I was from a Family of Builders and that my cost would be 50K he had a fucXXXX heart attack and before I could scratch told me he couldn't do it for less than 10K + VAT.

A price for any job should be set on the work involved, the merits of the project and the experience/reputation of the contractor. Sorry, the percentage game, is and always has been a game. (I fell out of the wrong side of the bed this morning.)

Dog walker

Prices do seem very high.

Sorry if I am hijacking this post but we want an architect to do a planning application for us. It is for a side extension to a semi-deatched house which will wrap around the back also. Approximately 50m2.

Any ideas how much a set of planning drawings will cost us? We would want him to do the application for us too?

I hope the cost isn't anything like what it seems to be for a house!!

sinnerboy

Fatima. Hope your feeling better .

In pricing a job - an architect - or builder is usually presented with a series of unknowns . Client expectations is probably the biggest one actually .

Some clients ( of builders or architects ) are decisive , clear and fair . Others are not , which leads to difficulties for all concerned and often with the client incapable of seeing that .

So in deciding to work ( architect or builder ) with a client or not -
an early-ish assessment has to made - how much time will this client need ?

The architect you speak of clearly made this assessment - leading to a
€ amount . Initially based on % cost , but the basis changed when you revealed that you would not be paying typical % build cost .

As an Architectural Technician - I see this as the vanishing spiral of opportunity - for me .

If the client is finding "value in favours" from all on the construction side - my time factored €amount looks unreasonable in % terms . The truth is that this self build direct labour method always demands more of my time . Result - I have not accepted an appointment on this basis for YEARS . Early paupers grave .

I don't expect to convince you - or anyone - of the validity of this post which
is my opinion based on many years of experience - No more or less valid than yours .

Wonky Knees

sinnerboy wrote: »

Fatima. Hope your feeling better .

In pricing a job - an architect - or builder is usually presented with a series of unknowns . Client expectations is probably the biggest one actually .

Some clients ( of builders or architects ) are decisive , clear and fair . Others are not , which leads to difficulties for all concerned and often with the client incapable of seeing that.

So in deciding to work ( architect or builder ) with a client or not -
an early-ish assessment has to made - how much time will this client need ?



The architect you speak of clearly made this assessment - leading to a
€ amount . Initially based on % cost , but the basis changed when you revealed that you would not be paying typical % build cost .

As an Architectural Technician - I see this as the vanishing spiral of opportunity - for me .

If the client is finding "value in favours" from all on the construction side - my time factored €amount looks unreasonable in % terms . The truth is that this self build direct labour method always demands more of my time . Result - I have not accepted an appointment on this basis for YEARS . Early paupers grave .





I don't expect to convince you - or anyone - of the validity of this post which
is my opinion based on many years of experience - No more or less valid than yours .

Had coffee, feeling much better now.

I agree. That's why I believe the price should not be a percentage but based on the nature of the work involved, the time and the experience of the contractor. It works both ways - does it not?

While it is a tradition in our family when one is building a family home for all to help out and in some cases for free, it would be wrong to expect others to work for free or anything less than what they are justly entitled to. OK I realize that for certain jobs a percentage could be used as a rule of thumb or a guide, but I just don't think it is transparent. I prefer someone to say to me that this will take X hours, X number of visits and X Sets of drawings and amendments, X amount of hassle and based on similar jobs I've done the price will be around Y.

mendel

I opened up quite a discussion here.

I just want to clarify that i was not quoted 17k but 12k. i will get design plans constructions plans and monitoring to ensure renovation matches plans. I will supply the engineer at my own cost.

I am actually happy enough with the quote. I feel i am paying for his ideas, his skills etc. If it was a straightforward house where i knew exactly what i wanted then possibly and AT would be sufficient at considerably less cost, but I'm happy. As a % it is relatively low of what renovation is going to cost

sinnerboy

Fatima - I think we understand each other even if we coming from different places .

mendel - pleased with your last post . I hope your project goes really well .

To anyone else reading - you can only very roughly gauge what a fair price is in broad terms in forums like this . Each site and each client will demand different inputs - or time - from the service provider - builder , architect , engineer , plumber - whomever .

muffler

mendel wrote: »

As a % it is relatively low of what renovation is going to cost

Its still costing you big bucks. But then again each to their own.

The most important thing is that you are happy with the architect and the service he is providing and thats all that counts at the end of the day.

Curious Geroge

mendel wrote: »

Folks, we have arranged to meet an architect for preliminary discussion re renovation plans.
We have just been told by someone that this particular architect quoted them 17k for plans and planning application for one off house? tell me this can't be right?

This guys must be very very quiet.. If we have'nt heard enough of them been unemployed, they still want the huge bucks.. Who gets paid 17K for this work, fair enough if he was managing the build but this figure is unreal.

ben bedlam

find an architectural technologist to do your work. They are usually FAR, FAR cheaper than the extortionist fees architects charge, and they are usually far more competant with a better construction knowledge than any architect. By the way, 17k is absolutly crazy, do not pay anywhere near that.

sinnerboy

I have added a poll here .

I know that human nature is to wish to pay as little as possible for everything but I ask for posters to give their best fair assessment .

Fees based on % of cost is an historic legacy harking back to about a decade ago . 1999 I think was the last time RIAI issued a table of fee scales .

Fees were indicated on a % basis , but adjusted
1. upwards depending on the job complexity ( eg warehouse vs hospital )
2. overall spend . i.e. % reduced as projects got very very large and % increased as jobs got very very small

10% of construction houses became the "default" for one off houses .

The RIAI were forced by competition regulations to stop publishing the table of fees . The RIAI argued that the table offered an unbiased reference point for all to see and gave a reference point for fee negotiations but this argument was not persuasive enough to "save" the table

So the question is - how would you prefer fees to be calculated . On the basis of time is the most common alternative . Would you favour this ?

My own misgivings are that that clients would be tempted to "save" time/money at the expense of the build quality

What do others think ? ( Punters and architects )

Bitten & Hisses

As a client, my preference would be as per my architect's method on our recent house design. i.e. he quoted a cost for the job, presumably based on how complex he estimated the process to be.
1. We had an initial meeting where he got a feel for our general direction, square footage, what accommodation we wanted, etc.
2. He issued a quote based on his feelings after that meeting.
3. I nearly got a coronary when I saw the quote. :eek:
4. Lots of negotiation.
5. The county planners had a field day with us, leading to lots of extra work for the architect.
6. We agreed on a sum to cover the extra work.
7. This resulted in a happy client and architect.

I absolutely loathe percentage-based fees, as I feel that they have little to do with the real world circumstances. Having dealt with supervising engineers on industrial projects who charge on a percentage basis, I have concluded that it is the means which favours the client the least of all.

BenK

ben bedlam wrote: »

find an architectural technologist to do your work. They are usually FAR, FAR cheaper than the extortionist fees architects charge, and they are usually far more competant with a better construction knowledge than any architect. By the way, 17k is absolutly crazy, do not pay anywhere near that.

I think this is a ridiculous post. What competencies are you talking about? Also how can you say architectural technologists 'have better construction knowledge than any architect'? If you're not looking for anything very creative design-wise then by all means an architectural technologist might be the way to go. But Architects are trained in design, for 5 years minimum, so you're not in any way comparing like with like. You appear to be quite ill-informed. And of course there are technologists out there that are better designers than architects (and equally architects that are better technologists) but I think it's fair to say the majority of architects are better designers due to their more extensive training in this regard. Also the OP has clarified that the 17k is not the quote, 12k is. If you're not happy with a quote I think most architects are willing to negotiate and clarify where exactly their quote came from.

I should add that I am an architect so maybe I am a little biased!

sinnerboy

And I am an Architectural Technician and am in agreement with Benk.

Ben bedlam - is welcome to his opinion .

icbarros

sinnerboy wrote: »

I have added a poll here .

sinnerboy, I think a 3rd option should be added to the poll > fixed fee.

I prefer to work with a fixed fee, the client knows from the start what he/she is going to spend and I know what I am getting as well. Any additional work is quoted separately.

I also think that most people don't realize what means to pay per hour and that they will ABSOLUTELY pay more if they chose this method. But I'm curious to know the poll results. :cool:

sinnerboy

Well a fixed fee could be implicit in either case .

% case - if % is based on a notional spend

time case - estimated time could be outlined at the start .

Ardent

donal1981 wrote: »

I have an architect that I am very happy with (Galway location)
I quoted 5 different local architects and he was also the best price for my self build. PM me if you want his details.

To the original poster - 17K is ridiculous price.

Know exactly what you want before you go to them. Perhaps they could throw in BER cert, or sign off on your stage payments as well?

Donal can you please pm me that architects details?

Mellor

fatimamansions wrote: »

And besides, any architect I know (still in the business) is actually very busy.

With all due respect, I suggest you don't know that many architects.;)

BenK wrote: »

Also how can you say architectural technologists 'have better construction knowledge than any architect'? If you're not looking for anything very creative design-wise then by all means an architectural technologist might be the way to go. But Architects are trained in design, for 5 years minimum, so you're not in any way comparing like with like. You appear to be quite ill-informed.
I should add that I am an architect so maybe I am a little biased!

I agree with you that an architect is trained in design, and in general, 99% of the time, architects are going to be better at design. This is a fact and petty squabbles over what each is better at is a pointless exercise.

I think Ben Bedlam might of came across the wrong way. And he was mainly hinted at the fact that Technologists have a better construction knowledge, which I would agree with. Technologist is 4 years by the way, so hardly a million miles away from architects in terms of time frame.

To each there own, design and construction.


Mellor (Arch. Tech btw)

BenK

To each their own of course Mellor. I didn't in any way question Technologists ability in construction knowledge or anything else and I'm not arguing at all over who's better because as you said that's pretty pointless. I would say each is as good as the other depending on the situation.

Benbedlam made a general accusation about the competence of architects (maybe it wasn't intentional) so being one I felt obliged to respond, whether that sounds petty or not.

In terms of time frame it's actually more like 7-8 years to do architecture (5-6 years college, 2-3 years structured working followed by lectures, exams, case study, interview etc.).

muffler

BenK wrote: »

Benbedlam made a general accusation about the competence of architects (maybe it wasn't intentional) so being one I felt obliged to respond, whether that sounds petty or not.

He wont be commenting trolling again.

2sounds

Have to say that were paying about 10% of build. We started back in 2005 so paid a premium.

We still havent even broke ground, long story which is not relevant here.

However Im my experience its been worth is so far, just about. Our Architects are managing this the whole way, design, planning, project management etc.

Its a complicated-ish build so would not have happened without their time.

Weve paid up 50% up front but their budget and the tenders weve received are well off so were not sure if were going ahead.

Id say we would be expected to pay a lot less now, I wonder whats the chances of haggling for a reduction at this stage (not much as I did sign a contract:()

fair enough.

Bicycle

We have an architect to whom we are paying a fixed fee, payable once we are happy with the plans.

The fee includes all design and consultations (quite a few at this stage), the planning application and the partial supervision of the build (we have agreed to jointly manage the build).

The bill will come to less than €2,000 including VAT.

The project is a home extension/renovation.