Adding 16" here or there usually isn't a big deal... assuming your home is built on 16" centers.

But I have a feeling you already knew that....

Remember that every single time you deviate from the plan you've contracted, you will have to pay more. Simple as that!

thanks, guys. I'm not talking about deviating from the plan we contract with the builder for. I'm talking about deviating from the plan the architect drew. And making the deviation before we contract with the builder. So the builder has the changed plan incorporated into his contract.

I guess one question would be should we let our builder have whatever draftsman he usually uses simply redraw that changed portion of the plan?

Our plans have our architects stamp. If we change something the County Building Department considers structural it needs to be done by the architect. We can take it to a different architect or structural engineer but then they would have to assume responsibility for the entire structural design. Tom

If you decide to change the plan before you sign a contract the best option would be to have your architect make the change. This just keeps things less confusing for everyone involved.

BTW, where I am building a small change like that would not require the city to approve. The only time the city would need approval is if the actual footprint of the house changed.

You should ask your architect to advise you on this issue rather than poll people who know nothing about the project.

Having the architect involved during the project is an option to consider carefully. Unless you are very experienced in the design and construction of homes, the architect could save you money and aggravation as well as improve the quality of the final product.

bj

this would worry me " I'm not talking about deviating from the plan we contract with the builder for. I'm talking about deviating from the plan the architect drew."

whatever plan your architect draws - the final plans - should be the plans that are referenced in your contract. The final plans should have everything noted on them - trim types, moldings, floor coverings etc. These plans will be dirstributed to all subs for their takeoff's and work scope. In areas where you have specialty trims or built-ins, there should be detailed drawings for them in the final set of plans. Think about it this way - all of the subs will need a set of directions on what to build - and those directions are the plans. If it is not shown on the plan - don't expect that it will be done the way you want.

If you want to make changes like you mention - archways (which we did too) - then the change must be coordinated through the builder using whatever process that is spelled out in the contract. Some changes are easy (carpet over here - wood floor over there) so no plan mods are required. But if you start changing things like archways - then that change must somehow get to the framers and trim carpenters - so mods to the plan will probably be required (could be as simple as an addendum with a drawing of what you want).

You can deviate as much as you want from the plan for what I would call cosmetic things to include interior non load bearing wall placement - without going back to the architect. However, for some cosmetic changes - you might want the architect to make you a sketch to see what it might look like first. We did this with our archway change. Of course - all chnages have a cost. If the change is structural - then the architect will most likely need to be involved.

I went into our build with the now famous line "we will not change anything after we sign the contract" which DW reminds me of constantly. Changes are inevitable - it's part of the joy in building a custom home.

Good luck!

sniffdog: thanks a lot for the specifics. I had not thought of just an addendum--what a great idea.

mightyanvil: I have discussed this possibility of a future change with my architect. She reiterated what is in our contract: she'll be happy to make changes later as an Optional Additional Service, billed at her hourly rate. I can barely afford the Basic Service, so for the simple things we're talking about it'll have to be a draftsman, I'm afraid. Plus, the time lag would kill us. Good architects in the big city, as you know, have waiting lines like good medical specialists do.

I need to talk with somebody, I guess, about just what the city building inspection people consider to be "structural." Actually, a builder could probably give me a good idea; probably has more experience with that end of things than most architects do.

OK, so here's part of the dilemma: the longer this design takes the more it's costing us, for reasons I've given before and won't bore everyone with again. SO, now almost 3 months into the Schematic Design and not done with that phase yet, for reasons not our fault, we want to move things along. We are sorely tempted to just agree to some "pretty" but too impractical/expensive design features our architect wants just to get this done already. Then change them later, using a draftsman where necessary. Everytime we go another round with her, it's more time and money down the drain.

All good advice and be careful. You change the architect's drawings and something goes wrong, leaks, structural problems etc, even if they did not affect the architect's work,architect can still contend this is not his work...it was not followed. Try to blame it on the builder and he will lay it on you b/c you asked him to do it.

As long as it is inconsequential, no prob, but if it is anything of significance, consult your architect. EG - in our house, architect drew a door into the alcove providing access to the master BR, the powder room and study, we changed it to a cased opening b/c we would have never shut the door...we did not get that redrawn, we basically just framed in the door way with no door in it. We changed a pitch break lean to porch roof to a gable to accomodate the ceiling heights (was just drawn wrong)... we had architect make that change. He needed to make sure pitches/valleys etc were compatible.

This may sound complicated but it really isn't. The building department is only concerned with the materials and systems described in the building code. Building codes for houses are prescriptive, i.e. they tell you specifically what is allowed and what is not. Typical house structures are usually described in tables. If a structural issue is not covered by the building code (like a point load on a beam) usually the owner must hire an engineer to design and stamp the structural design. If it is as simple as an LVL header or I-joists the lumberyard can supply you with a stamp from the manufacturer.

I've never worked in a state where an architect's stamp could be substituted or where an architect's stamp was required or meant anything on drawings for a house. Usually a GC can change the structure as long as it falls within the building code prescriptive requirements. How the building inspector wants to be notified of such a change differs greatly between jurisdictions but a sketch from an architect should mean no more than a sketch from anyone else. However, some jurisdictions do require that the original designer sign an affidavit stating that the work was performed according to the contract documents and you would need your architect to do that. In your case, since the architect is not going to be involved in the construction phase, I don't see how that would be possible anyway. Make sure the building department is not going to ask for information from the "architect of record" later.

When a draftsman changes something I think it would be appropriate to issue a separate sketch rather than alter the architect's drawing. You certainly shouldn't modify anything that bears the architect's name or seal.

It is so difficult to get all the workers on a site to be paying attention to the correct drawings that I usually have to reissue the set and mark the perimeter of each drawing with a bright color. Still, when I visit a site I often see drawings being used that were only issued for preliminary pricing and once a set was marked "NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION" in large letters printed diagonally across each drawing. It had been filed at the building department and a permit issued.

From long experience in these matters I am going to predict that the problem you will encounter is that without professional representation you will be open to excessive upcharges for the changes, some because of lack of coordination in the field and some from subs overcharging the GC. I would recommend carrying a 5% budget contingency in addition to a normal contingency and expect to use it for design change overcharges. This amount would buy you a lot of hours from an architect.

I believe it's "pay me now or pay me later". It is quite possible that the cost of the architect making the changes will be the cheaper route. But if you can't actually get your architect to do the work properly then you have quite a different problem.

mightyanvil: thanks for explaining what's structural.

BTW: come on down to Georgia where architects get some respect. Ex., here's City of Marietta's permitting requirements, which apply to all new construction:

If Construction is over $100,000 or if the major occupancy is assembly, multi-family, educational, industrial, or the building/structure is three stories high or more, or the building/structure is 5,000 S.F. or more in area, or the construction falls under State of Georgia Fire Safety Rule, then the plans must be stamped by a Georgia Registered Engineer or Architect.

bj

I really feel your pain on the architect process - it was very painful to get final plans out of our guy.

I can tell you that the key elements of the plans were done fairly quickly - foundation, room layouts, roof line, windows, elevations etc. It was the detailing - the cross sections, the detailed drawings for certain complicated structural areas - that too forever to get done.

You have to decide where you want to draw the line - because the hourly fees really add up. WHat I finally did was call the acrhitect and tell him that my wife and I were starting to think about caneling the project entirely (which we were) because we wanted to move along with our project - and the builder could not start without final plans. WHat he did was get me a set of "buildable" plans - plans that were sufficient to meet the county requirement for getting a building permit and also for gettign a loan.

Once we had that set - he then worked on a few of the complicated areas - cross sections - that he believed were necessary. He also did some of the interior detailing - but not much. We decided with the builder that we would wing that on site - since it was cosmetic and needed a real 3D perspective anyway to make decisions.

That was enough to get the plans out and get moving. Since that time, we have made some changes such as: changed the front door and transom (which impacted interior archways from semi circle to eliptical), moved the washer and dryer out of the utility room and into the a master suite closet, added a second floor washer and dryer, added som einterior framing to support built in medicine cabinets, changed the ceiling in a powder room, moved a bay window down so that the kitchen counters had no step up behind the main sink, and a few others. In all of these cases - all we needed was a simple sktech (some I drew, some the architect did) that was added to the plans or passed to the approriate people via email.

Hope that helps.

sniffdog: thanks so much! We're under contract for 10% of the construction cost for basic services (with a minimum fee that will probably exceed the construction cost we can afford). Any add-ons are billed at her hourly rate. We're at the 90% Schematic Design submittals, have already paid her for that.

I've contacted my lawyer about what rights I'd have to build. I have designed over half of the house, though not the elevations. I gave her scaled drawings and have documentation of their delivery by UPS. So, although I don't need her drawings (all were emailed pdf files), I do need the right to use my own handdrawn work, which now has incorporated some of her suggestions.

So, terminating will be a real pain. She is too prominent here to imagine that she'd cooperate in giving us a Builder's plan. So, there are legal as well as practical issues.

I have a builder under consideration who I know could build our house. So, I have a message in to him about whether he'd be comfortable if we dropped the architect and had a draftsman work from our paper and pencil drawings. It's such a simple house; I can develop elevation drawings myself that are different from hers.

BUT don't tell me this is the quick part! It's 3 months already and the last revision is still not acceptable. Just the basic layout and elevations. Man, oh man.

We put her on notice yesterday to suspend her work. She called and left a message that she wants to work it all out. To work out all the dimensions that are at issue in a four-way conference call (me, DH, her, her jr archy/CAD drawer). That's where our problem is now. Jr. archy is too shy to talk on the phone or ask questions; just sits and draws, then explains why he made his decisions. I offered long ago to come sit while he works. DH is fed up and wants us to have a work session at their office with the computer and fix everything.

What a mess, but thanks again ALL for the various perspectives.

Get everyone in the same room and everything will get straightened out. I'm not a fan of designing on the phone.

Designing a house involves a large amount of personal owner input and feedback and a lot of fussy problem solving with a disproportionately short time frame for production. For that reason home design is rarely profitable for a firm. If you add any level of poor communication you've got a real mess even if the architect really cares about the project.

Ironically having the client give you a set of schematic plans rarely shortens the time needed to finish. General rather than specific ideas from the client are best. I've only had one client give me a drawing and by the time we were done none of it was the same. It was a nightmare.

Get together and hash it all out, then build it.

mightyanvil: thanks for chiming in. We've just left a message asking to meet in their office. Unfortunately, due to her crowded schedule, she prefers conference calls and email. The jr. assistant prefers emails explaining what he did, after he did it. He's wasting incredible amounts of everyone's time.

Have no idea why they took this on except that I think they enjoy doing some residential work as a change of pace. Most of their work is commercial new construction and remodeling. And getting those LEEDs credits for business is big business now. (They also have engineers on staff.) I know residential is harder, but the bulk of their work sounds so incredibly boring to me.

Or maybe they just wanted the extra money.

MightyAnvil,

With respect to how things are done in different places, I was told about 20 years ago by our architect in California that an architect here can seal the structural engineering of any building except a school or a hospital.

Does she not realize that by meeting with you once she might save a considerable amount of time for those other things she's so busy with? Explain that you know she is busy, but you feel that one hour spent together in person is going to save her three hours of back and forth down the road.

Maybe if you offer to pay for one hour of her hourly rate, you can "buy" the meeting time with her. It only seems fair that if in theory she will charge you say $100 an hour for alterations in the future, that you be allowed to have her commit to an hour of working on your plan with you there!

rachelh: Good thought, but she's agreed to a meeting this week, working with us, her young cohort, and the computer. She was very conciliatory. Pretended she thought it was inconvenient for us to come to her office. I want to be there where they have all their stuff and won't have any problem putting their hands on reference material, records, etc.

In fact, we both plan to make it clear we've reached the point in the design that we feel we should be there all the time! Sure that'll thrill 'em.

For $50K she can endure our presence from time to time.

For a full service fee your architect should be happy to provide full service. I worked for an architect who taught me to always know the expectation of a client and never fail to meet it in a meeting. Of course, he never lived by that principle but he expected us to.

bj

use whatever method is best for communicating what you want to the architect. If you can draw, give them a sketch. If you find a picture in a magazine - use that.

I went round and round with my architect on several design details. Tried the general approach with words - he kept missing the point. Drew him a sktech - done in one shot.

It's all about communicating your expectations to the designer and to minimize the number of iterations since time is money. Use whatever method that works best for you and your design team.

It sounds like you are in a pickle - but it can be solved. I would get the builder involved - since they would know what they need to meet code, county requirements, loan requirements.

I would also prioritize: 1) Get a plan that is buildable first - good enough to meet county code requirements for issuance of a building permit and for the builder to price the house (builder input needed here) , 2) detail design only those areas that you and the builder feel are too risky to wing on site and 3) if there is money left over, work the smaller, but time consuming, cosmetic details. If you don't have enough money - eliminate item 3 and work these on site with the builder.

You can work it out, but you have to focus on your objective which should be to get a final set of plans (the minimum set of drawings) that will let you start your project. Once you have that set, you can start building. In parallel (if you choose to) you can work out trimming/cosemetic details.

Hope this helps.

sniffdog: thanks for all the tips. I'm taking everything I can to our meeting to see if I can clarify things. The layout was finished on May 29. Then the jr. architect started messing with it to make space for an archway over the front porch to fit better. Ended up changing the dimensions of almost every room in the house. Took space out of closets--which he said is unimportant space. WRONG! Made the Master Bath smaller, because he ran out of space by the time he got to that end of the house.

All without calling to ask us first. At our meeting I'm going to be nice, but what I want to say is: "You can take your arches and put them----wherever you want to. Just don't rearrange any of my walls to do it."

So, we shall see.