Hi
I am confusing why architects shall provide a few alternate designs/documents as basic service in terms of the question in subtitle.
I could see the sentence under section 6.3 of B101, but I could also find an item of multiple preliminary designs under “supplemental services” 4.1 of B101.
Would anyone tell me the difference between them???
thanks in advance,
Hi @humeda !
Thanks for your question! The practice exam questions are randomized so I can’t see what exact question you’re mentioning. If you can reply with a screenshot of the question and the explanation, I may be able to answer your question a bit more.
6.3 in the B101 refers to the cost of work and is essentially saying when we create fees, we need to include time for design alternates.
When you’re first working with a client on conceptual or even schematic design, there will be some back and forth on what designs they prefer which typically leads to a handful of different design options until something is nailed down. We should be including these alternate designs as part of our fee in the beginning. If you’re working with a client and the concept studies or schematic design schemes become very numerous (for example I worked with a client who went through 22 different massing schemes) that’s when you would probably want to revise the contract to include the “multiple preliminary designs” as a supplemental service. I hope this helps!
Thanks,
Rebecca
Thanks for replying and explanation.
so in my understanding, it is very vague whether multiple options (requested or not) can be either additional service and included in basic service depends on the client?
I attached 3 screenshots regarding this question. I would appreciate if you would help me to understand. (last one is from case study 1)
Thanks,
Hi @humeda !
Thanks for the follow up! In the first screenshot, the term used is “alternate designs” which as the B101 section 6.3 tells us should be included in our fee and scope, which is why it’s correct.
In the second example, this happens during the construction. Alternate designs were likely already presented to the client and the design they chose was taken all the way through CDs. A major change during the construction phase requested by the client would be additional compensation to the architect.
In the last example, the scope changed because the client acquired land to incorporate a park. This wasn’t included in the original contract and doesn’t count as an “alternate design” since there is increased scope hence why there will be additional compensation to the architect.
As mentioned before, during concept study and schematic design it’s reasonable to provide multiple design options to the client and that is included in our fee. If the client continuously asks for alternate designs that take over the fee or hold up that phase of the project, it’s safe to assume we would go back and alter the contract to include additional services. Anything that comes up for re-design during construction or due to increased scope would also be an additional compensation to the architect. Hope that helps!
Thanks,
Rebecca
Rebecca,
It helps me a lot.
Thank you so much,
Hi @coachrebeccasmith! I also had a question about this line in the contract. 6.3 doesn’t say “shall provide”, but does say “shall be permitted to include…design alternates as may be necessary”. Since the alternates revolve around a “price concern” and not an actual overrun, wouldn’t these alternates fall into 4.2.1.6 “Preparation of design and documentation for alternate…proposal requests proposed by the Owner”? Or in cases like this is it best to assume an actual overrun has occurred?
Thanks!
-Sonja
