Architectural and design fees, reasonable quote?

[sammyg2]

I've engaged an architect to provide all necessary design and construction drawings for a simple single story room addition.
We've been given a quote for $6k.
That includes structural engineering review, HVAC, electrical design, etc.
Everything necessary to apply for a permit. It also includes any necessary changes specified in the permitting process.

Sounds reasonable to me, but I've never dipped my toe into this pool before.
Thoughts?

[A930Rocket]

I paid $2k for a stock set of house plans. Changes were extra and it didn’t include structural, electrical, HVAC or anything else.

So, $6k seems reasonable.

[mrbeverlyhills]

Depending on the area, size of the addition and difficulty in obtaining permits (historical/beach/seismic/hillside zones) but I would ask what they are charging by the hour: $75 for a normal addition in CA is low end, $125 is high and if your boy has a name, $300.

48 hours at $125 seems like a long time for a room addition to existing structure. If you are going up and footings need to be strengthened below, it is mathematics and the calcs could add enough time to make the $6k about right.

[HarryD]

Just remember, an Architect will give you a beautiful space. an engineer will make a space that works properly.

Why? Architects get an Arts (BA, MA etc) degree while engineers get a Science (BS, MS) degree.

[HardDrive]

Seems reasonable to me.

[URY914]

[HarryD]

Give an architect a blank sheet of paper and get a great design. Ask how much, get a blank look.

[plexiform]

Just for comparison I’m in the middle of a major remodel and architectural design and planning is quoted to be around $25-30k in central California coast. This does not include permits/fees. This will include adding about 1200sqft and reworking most of our existing 2300sqft.

[sammyg2]

Thanks everyone for the insight.
I figured it was OK but as a rookie I'm overly cautious.
Plus it hurts like heck when I have to pry open my wallet

[Erakad]

I added on to my house, a stairwell, 2 bedrooms, redesign of main floor and basement, baths, powder room,...pretty large renovation, in all, added 1600 sq ft and paid $5K for the architect to design.

[look 171]

You cheap bastard Make your wife happy, isn't that worth a lot more?

5-6 k seems to be about right. One tip I have for you, Dean is to pay a small fee or deposit up front for his work on the preliminary design for your approval(demand this). Upon approval, don't pay the architect (this is if I am involved with the project from the beginning, holding my client's hand through) until he gets the plans stamped or approved by the city. Next step is to have your builder review, pay the big bucks and start. I know many architect hate this because they need a draw on large projects to pay bills but on an addition like yours, it should work out just fine. Ok architects, I have my flame suit on.

[Nostril Cheese]

My father was a builder who became an architect. Spent the first part of my life building homes. I was also a draftsman for many years. 75% of my job was fixing architectural mistakes.

Make sure the architect knows what the f*** he's doing. Get a builder and engineer to review it before paying the architect.

[look 171]

Originally Posted by Nostril Cheese

My father was a builder who became an architect. Spent the first part of my life building homes. I was also a draftsman for many years. 75% of my job was fixing architectural mistakes.

Make sure the architect knows what the f*** he's doing. Get a builder and engineer to review it before paying the architect.

Everyone makes mistakes, trying to catch it before money is exchanged is the key. I seen numerous occasions where the lazy engineer that never show up at the job site (99% of them do not) and go off the architect's plans. Architect do not like to bust open ceilings to verify rafter runs. Engineer follow suit and spec Paralams that run along the length of ceiling rafters pouring unnecessary footings serving no purpose yet inspectors will demand install or else they wouldn't sign off on the rough framing. Someone screw up and the owner pays the price.

[javadog]

Sounds high to me for a simple addition.

[john70t]

Originally Posted by HarryD

Just remember, an Architect will give you a beautiful space. an engineer will make a space that works properly.

I wasted $750 on trying to support a sagging cantilever. (edit: not Kach..)
He had CAD files, photos, everything.
The resulting design did stay invisible as the client desired, and technically fulfilled our agreement, but it was structurally useless.
He thought a couple of long 2x10's perpendicular to the rim joist would function as load support.
SMH. It dd not take a structural engineer to know that was a garbage design.

Per the builder, I ended up with a mighty tied in glue lam across the entire expanse resting on 2x6 posts on top of protected 4' concrete footings.
(2x8 would have been even better. but there was no room.)
Simple and strong.

When you are looking over the design....imagine actually using it.

Is there enough light, or would bigger window add a security/privacy problem?
Is the doorway big enough for a wheelchair and couches or whatnot?
Do you want it separated from the main house or connected with big french doors for example?
What are the water drains going to go through to get to the main?
Is the space flexible enough to be used for other things in the future? (i.e. study vs workshop vs guest room)

[dennis in se pa]

A qualified builder does designs around here. Includes dealing with the codes department. It's not rocket science - it's more like brushing your teeth. If you want something to brag about and fancy, that is different, but a simple first floor addition for a $6k design fee? Must be a big addition.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Originally Posted by HarryD

Just remember, an Architect will give you a beautiful space. an engineer will make a space that works properly.

Why? Architects get an Arts (BA, MA etc) degree while engineers get a Science (BS, MS) degree.

Totally untrue.

I have a BS (undergrad) and a M.Arch. (grad). A B.Arch or M.Arch is a different degree than either a B.A. or M.A. I had had to take calculus-based physics, materials science and statics courses, as well as extensive coursework in structures - on top of design studios, building science, etc.

A good architect knows enough about engineering to work with their engineering consultants and not just kick stuff to them. Often we hire them to shed liability, not because we can’t necessarily do something. Also consider that some systems (especially mechanical) are getting so complicated now due to energy codes that you really need a specialist to delve into them and ensure you’ll get something that’ll comply at the end of the day and “own” that code compliance on their stamp. Sometimes it’s to make sure a project gets done in a certain time (designing structural systems, mechanical systems, etc. takes away a lot of time from the overall design effort - it’s easier and more efficient go hire a specialist and coordinate it). A design team is an orchestra and the architect is the conductor.

Some states allow a much easier path to architectural licensure than I had but even so, an architect must understand the fundamentals of ALL building disciplines to be considered competent. There’s no way around it, even with today’s “dumbed down” version of the ARE...

To suggest that architects don’t understand functionality or engineering is disingenuous and asinine.

[dad911]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

.......

Some states allow a much easier path to architectural licensure than I had but even so, an architect must understand the fundamentals of ALL building disciplines to be considered competent. There’s no way around it, even with today’s “dumbed down” version of the ARE...

To suggest that architects don’t understand functionality or engineering is disingenuous and asinine.

Normally true, but you haven't met my ex-sister's husband........he passed the test eventually (sat for it as a grandfathered Chem E) but had no clue.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

In fairness I have dealt with a few colleagues who had their licenses and wondered “how on earth?” I guess some people just get lucky and others work for it.

Even if someone is a licensed professional, if they don’t have the skills and base level of competence that credential is supposed to represent then they likely won’t go far or last too long in practice.

Sorry for my earlier grouchiness but I get intensely annoyed when people think all architects do is make pretty things. Yes we do that too but there’s an awful lot more to it. Professional training for architecture is every bit as long and difficult as for medicine or law. In most cases it’s 5-8 years of formal education plus 6-8 years of apprenticeship (a few exceptions but that’s typical).

Nothing against engineers either - I work with them every day and the success of my projects is every bit dependent on them as my own skills and abilities too. You rise or fall as a team, ultimately - at least on the big jobs.

[look 171]

It like everything else, having a basic understanding of how thing work in general goes a long way. Some people are in it just for the beauty of the building and really have no interest on any structural aspect of a building. They should be interior designers instead of architects. I have done work for some brilliant folks and some just want to get by producing drawings to get past the city and really have no business in the architecture. There are many of those in every businesses or trades.