Hello
We are planning to build a two storey extension to our newly purchased small detached 1956 built house near the centre of Basingstoke.
The house will require some re-modelling inside. Several of the interior walls are solid, but not necessarily load bearing. How the conventionally appearing hipped roof is supported may be an issue in regard to moving interior walls to enlarge a bedroom.
In spite of my years I have never done anything like this before, only isolated d-i-y- projects.
However this question isn’t about specifics.
It is easy enough to find architects advertising, and two have been personally recommended, but the problem is the massive step in paying between £600 to £1700 for the first set of drawings to planning permission before we have the vaguest idea what an architect may come up with, apart from them saying simply that the project is “do-able”.
Some architects offer a free site visit, and may make a very rough non committal sketch, the majority we have spoke to do not. But a site visit doesn’t tell us any more about what an architect has in mind.
What happens if an architect says a project is do-able but after being paid a stage 1 fee goes on to produce totally unsuitable plans, for example saying that an extra bedroom can only be provided by extending to the side boundary when the householder wants to keep the side boundary open?
One way round it would be to insist on minimum specific points as part of the contract, eg upstairs bedroom must be enlarged by moving wall, full size bathroom provided.
Another way would be to ask for more detailed sketches at an intermediate price.
Should I use the above options in my approach, or is that not feasible?
The other main problem is finding out to what extent the architect, or maybe the delegated builder, will manage the project.
Finally, would it be better to go the other way round, eg find a builder first, who works with an architect. Would I find out more about how the extension would be built before I had to commit if I did it that way?