Architect Cost What is Reasonable?

I have to take issue with these comments, sorry but they are simply not true and if I was an architect I would be pretty offended. Architect’s fees are not governed by anyone other than the firm who is providing the fee (unlike real estate agents, for example). Some architects may charge a percentage of the contract, although it's pretty rare these days in my experience. We (architects, engineers etc) often calculate or do a sanity check on our fees based on a percentage of the build cost (depending on size, complexity, etc), as it historically works out about right most of the time, but it is not contractually tied to the project value in any way. It is also very rare these days to be paid by the hour for a construction project. 99% of our engagements are fixed fee. Pretty much the only hourly rate work I do is forensic engineering and expert witness cases where a contractor has failed to carry out their work in accordance with the contract or where their work has failed (all of which can usually be avoided by employing reputable professional consultants to act on your behalf for design and supervision of construction work).

The reason why architects and engineers don't cut their fees is because it costs a particular amount to run a professional practice and provide a high level of professional service, including quality assurance, continual professional development, insurances, overheads etc. If they cut their fees, they have to cut the quality and completeness of their services. It’s that simple. To claim that design professionals are ripping clients off en masse is just silly. Look at who is making all the money in the construction industry. Hint: it’s not the architects or engineers. Look in the car park of any builder’s office or the cars parked at the site meeting. The Range Rovers, BMW X5s and Landcruisers and flash dual cab utes don’t belong to the architect, 9 times out of 10 they belong to the builder. Who has the big house on the canal with the big boat? Rarely the architect. Rarely the engineer.

To answer the OP’s question, for most fully-designed construction projects you would typically budget in the ballpark of 10% of the total value for design fees (this should include engineering and certification as well). You will find that architects, engineers and other design professionals will tend to vary in their fees, that’s just an unavoidable reality, as frustrating as it must be. Basically this is because different firms will have a different understanding of your project, and will have different levels of service to you as a client and to the level of detail they go to with documentation. They’re pricing an intangible ‘idea’, whereas contractors pricing a fully designed build on the other hand are pricing a quantifiable and detailed ‘thing’ – so their prices are typically closer and more consistent.

You could use a building designer as opposed to an architect, this may be a lower cost. It may depend on each state, but my understanding is that a building designer (a.k.a draftsman, architectural technician etc) is licenced to do the same thing that architects can do, however a building designer has usually done a 1-2 year TAFE course, and an architect has done a 5 year university course, so the architect in theory has a much higher level of first-principles knowledge and can approach design problems with a wider perspective. A good building designer will be able to design a great house, no problems, but they tend to operate more on the “this is the way we do it” type approach rather than a first principles approach, which may be fine for what you want.

Personally, based on my experience, I think that you will give yourself the best opportunity to get the most value if you get the design carried out by someone independent of the build process. As I think you have identified, there is a huge conflict of interest when you hand over design responsibility to the same party who stands to profit from its construction. Basically you’re giving them the reins to design the build to best suit them, rather than to best suit you. You’re also essentially taking away the competition so they don’t have to price competitively once you have signed a contract. If you go with an independent designer, you own the drawings and you can get competitive pricing from several contractors to ensure you are getting good value. So the money you’ve spent upfront on the design is probably paid back several times in getting more competitive construction pricing.

That said, I think it's always a good idea to get some feedback on the design from contractors, as they may be able to give you some suggestions for areas where efficiencies can be found if you are willing to accept them.