Thread: Architect Question

Why use her at all ? Why not go straight to the drafty ? 100 bucks an hour for a bird on maternity leave dont do it

Must admit I was thinking the same thing. I've never enlisted the services of an architect, but I'd expect to pay a fair bit for the privilege - not that it's not worth it mind you - but it depends on what you want. However to want to charge $100/hour for a job on the side, I reckon is a bit rich. But again I say that not knowing what the standard charge out rate is.

Perhaps you would be better with a building designer. I had an entire dual occupancy dwelling of 4 beds + 3 beds designed, drawn up and DA submitted by a building designer for about $3,500. What we wanted was pretty standard - normal looking house, nothing fancy. If you want something 'out there' then you'll probably need an architect.

It's a shame bitingmidge is away at present, he loves these questions

Well, I am thinking that it might be worth it for the 'ideas'. We want to create a nice entrance (two story void or something that lets the light it), and despite looking at countless magazines, still can't work it out. I thought I would have to have the ideas in place before i spoke to a drafty?

Get out your tape measure, do a scale sketch of the floor plan, take some pics of the house, and post it all up.
You may get some suggestions and ideas thrown at you.

Go for it!!!! $100 per hour is cheap .... even for a job on the side. Standard charge out rates are around $120p/h graduate $150-180p/h architect $200p/h director. It might sound steep but it isn't often that you work by the hour.

With that being said get a fixed price and a scope of what you are going to expect for your money. $100 per hour could quickly escalate and you may end up sending more than you want to and end up with less than you need.

Make sure that she is using cad and will hand over the file, even if it is only sketch design. It will save the drafty time, and you money later on. Sounds like she is pulling out at sketch design due to not being registered yet (happens for a number of reasons, not necessarily no good at their job), or possibly no professional liability insurance (mmm sounds like somebody I know).

We can go on and on about the differences between the drafty, building designer and architect but at the end of the day it depends on the quality of the individual, not what their formal training may be. The architect shouldn't be seen as only being able to do something 'out there' but a good architect will be able to bring your ideas to life, and also use their experience and knowledge on structure and materials, which hopefully will save you heart ache in the future.

As for having the architect oversee the entire thing .... possibly not worth it. It is a small job by the sounds of it and it will be hard to find somebody interested. If the structure is basic the builder will be able to get by with the structural engineers details and the basic drawings required for the town planning (possibly DA) and building permit (or your equivalent). The kitchen can be detailed by the manufacturer as they will provide you with the best advise.

Good luck with it .....

OK thanks for advise - really appreciate everyone's comments.

Just one more thing - can anyone advise how much detail i can expect in a sketch design? Does this go into what materials are to be used or is it just of a high level sketch of things?

Cheers

Your sketch design should be at a detail so that you can understand what is going on but perhaps not everything has been resolved. You can specify what level of detail that you want the architect to acheive, but at the end of the day it will take longer and cost more.

The level that you are looking at achieving is to a stage where you can give the drawings to your drafty and they can build on them.

Design development which is the next stage will formalise elevations, notes, dimensions etc. to a level suitable to gain permits.

You do realise that you will need an engineer, to do the design?

Cheap is dear.

The architect is trained to design. A draftsman is trained to draw someone elses design.

The architect has a good idea of what costs what and should be able to design to a price. This is his/her area of expertise. The draftsman is trained to draw.

The architect will have an in-depth knowledge of building materials. The draftsman is trained to draw.

The architect is trained (and hopefully experienced) in dealing with local councils and their regulations. The draftsman is trained to draw.

Should I go on?

Taking short cuts puts you at risk for expensive problems. Why do this. The fee you have been quoted is cheap. I am having a professional office built over the garage. The architect's fee (also as a private job) is about $3000. He has liaised with the builder, the three of us has met, sorted out costs, and I am happy to be left in the hands of a capable buider.

Oh, my father and sister are both architects. Unfortunately dad is 93 and my sister lives in another country. I was initially trained as a quantity surveyor (including training as a draftsman). I do know what's what.

Regards from Perth

Derek

Originally Posted by DvdHntr

You do realise that you will need an engineer, to do the design?

You may need a geotech, and footings design, but your council may have a specification. Beyond that you won't necessarily have to have an engineer if the construction design is within code parameters.

Originally Posted by derekcohen

A draftsman is trained to draw someone elses design.

The architect has a good idea of what costs what and should be able to design to a price. This is his/her area of expertise. The draftsman is trained to draw.

The architect will have an in-depth knowledge of building materials. The draftsman is trained to draw.

The architect is trained (and hopefully experienced) in dealing with local councils and their regulations. The draftsman is trained to draw.

Perhaps that would describe a draftsman who's working for an architect, but a lot of them go out on their own after achieving competence in all the areas that you've outlined, and a lot of them put a bit of time into providing all the services that the public would require from an architect.
You can save yourself some serious dough if you find the right guy. Unfortunately, he won't have 'B Arch' written after his name, but you'll just have to live with that.

You can save yourself some serious dough ...

What do you call serious douugh? $500 ... $1000 ... $1500

On a job costing $25 - 100K? (or more).

You'd risk that for $1000? (or less).

Good luck.

Regards from Perth

Derek

I have used an Architect on a number of occassions from full drawings and service to just concept. The most recent was this year when renovating an office. $100 per hour is cheap, so far we have been very happy with the ideas and the end result. Quite honestly if you want a bog basic, boring unimaginative piece of work go the drafsman, the building inspector will love it as will the builder as it will be nice and simple and not to hard. Work with the Architect and you should still end up with something affordable but with a bit of style and flair. I'm with Derek and Sir Stinky the amount you pay compared to the total cost of the job is reasonable, and the end result should reflect the extra effort put in by someone with a few clues. FWIW I am not saying draftsman don't have ideas its just that I'm yet to find one who has.

The office job cost $1500 (design fee), we needed an engineers report for loads on door openings and we did the drawing ourselves as the physical walls remained unchanged. What we paid for was internal layout, design ideas and colour, and it was worth every penny.

Whatever you do get a fixed price. Every day she works will cost you $800. Can you afford that? How can you monitor her "design hours". Truth is that you cannot do it. If she comes up with something that doesn't work for you, do you still pay her?

I like using architects when I want ideas. That said, some of the so called designs I've seen are very ordinary.

Talking to a builder also has potential as far as designs are concerned. Mostly because they are exposed to the work of architects and designers. In my experience, there is very little that is not adopted from elsewhere. The most notable exception to this is the amazing "gherkin building" in London.

Did I say that you should get a fixed price before you proceed.

Originally Posted by derekcohen

You'd risk that for $1000? (or less).

Well the architect that my sister hired five years ago cost me and her a lot more than that in his mistakes.

He'd drawn up the plans and got them approved based on a surveyors report with an indemnifying disclaimer attached. I'd cleared my slate to start work, and when I rang the surveyor to define the boundaries, he came back a week later with a ridiculously high estimate to do the job. We got someone else with a cheaper estimate and it took three months to resolve the matter. It was some crap about the only defined boundaries on record, dated back to when farmer Jim swapped a pig for a metre of his neighbour's land, and my sisters boundary was supposed to be a foot inside where the proposed extension had been drawn, even after the 900mm setback was taken into account. It's just lucky for the architect that after paying a small fortune to formalize everything, she was able to register the boundary where the existing fence was located. If not, the extension would have been a metre smaller, and a bit impractical for her needs.

When I was part way through the footings, I had a good look at the plans and noticed that the upstairs bathroom, partly in a roof space had a head height of just 1200mm at the wall. Apart from being illegal, it was obviously totally impractical, and had to be re-drawn by stealing floorspace from an adjoining landing and bedroom. If construction of the upper floor and drainage had started without modification of the plans, it would have been a disaster. Shear incompetence I'd call it, and my sister wasn't impressed with the loss of floor area. I can assure you it's not the first time I've picked up mistakes in an architects drawings either. Some of them major.

His estimate on the job was $150,000, and it ended up costing over $50,000 before a shovel was turned, and over $300,000 in total, even after some cost cutting from the extravagant specifications on the plans. Some of the materials specified were ridiculously expensive and I don't think he had a clue, but I suppose they would have looked good in his resume. He'd specified a two storey sandstone veneered external wall along a narrow side path that would be barely noticeable from anywhere. The price was astronomical, so the wall was bagged by he bricklayers as they built the wall instead. If she'd known the cost in advance, she'd never have started the job, and she wouldn't be battling to pay the mortgage now.

There's incompetent clowns in every game, and having a 'B Arch' in your name won't indemnify you from idiocy. I'd certainly advise my sister not to go for someone who was fresh out of UNI again. A draftsman with a bit of experience under his belt would be a much safer bet.
Of course some architects are very good, and they give 2:1 details of every tricky aspect, with every screw noted, and everything fits. But some just give you a 1:100 drawing that looks good on paper, but just doesn't work in a three dimensional world. It's the builder that finds this out, and often too late.