5 Things Your Architect Won't Tell You About Planning Permission

Architects are trained to design beautiful buildings and navigate building regulations. But when it comes to planning permission, many blur the line between what's genuinely needed and what's an extra billable hour.

This isn't malice. It's a structural incentive: more services = more fees. But you should know what's actually essential and what's being padded.

Here are five things architects usually don't volunteer.

1. You Might Not Need an Architect at All

The most honest thing an architect could tell you: if your project qualifies for permitted development, you don't need one.

If you're doing a standard rear extension that fits PD rules (4m deep, roof matches existing, no window changes), a structural engineer can sign off the Building Regulations, and you need nothing else.

Many architects, when asked "do I need planning permission?", will say "let me design something for you" rather than "actually, you probably don't need permission at all."

Reality: 40-50% of residential extensions don't need planning permission. If that's you, hiring an architect to prepare planning drawings is money wasted. What you should do: Use a tool like PlanCheck to understand if you're in PD territory before you pay for design. Only hire an architect if planning permission is actually needed (or if you want custom design beyond PD limits).

2. The £5,000 Design Is Not That Different from the £2,000 One

Architects often charge based on project complexity. A £2,000 extension design and a £5,000 one might differ only in detail - finishes, material specifications, site surveys.

The core output - planning drawings, elevations, site plan, Design and Access Statement - is broadly the same.

Why the price difference? Sometimes justified (listed building work, complex site issues). Often not - it's just where their practice has priced that service tier. Reality: Many experienced architects can produce planning-quality drawings in 15-20 hours of work. At £75-100/hour (realistic industry rate), that's £1,125-2,000. Charges above that are mostly profit or padding. What you should do: Get quotes from 2-3 architects. Ask what's included in the fee and what's extra. Don't assume a higher price means better output.

3. Pre-Application Consultation with the Council Is Often Skipped (But Should Not Be)

Before designing and spending money on architect drawings, you can pay the council £120-250 for a pre-application consultation. They tell you: "This will likely be approved" or "You'll face issues with X and Y."

This is invaluable. It prevents designing something the council will refuse.

But here's the issue: Many architects skip pre-application because it doesn't generate fees for them. They'd rather design, submit, and if the council objects, redesign (which generates more fees). Reality: Pre-application takes 1-2 weeks and costs £120-250. It could save you £1,000+ in rework. What you should do: Request a pre-application consultation yourself. Ask the council for feedback before paying the architect to finalize designs. Most councils are helpful at this stage.

4. Overengineering Is a Profit Center

If your extension touches the roof or involves any structural work, you need a structural engineer's drawings. This is legitimate and necessary.

But here's where it gets murky: Some architects recommend (or their engineer contacts recommend) more structural work than is strictly needed.

Examples:

"We should install lateral bracing here" (optional, unless specific circumstances)

"You'll need a steel beam" (sometimes you need concrete instead, cheaper)

"We need a surveyor to assess the foundation" (sometimes a visual inspection is enough)

These recommendations add £500-2,000 to the cost and generate more work for the engineer (who the architect may have a referral relationship with).

Reality: Structural engineers have ethical obligations to specify safe designs, not maximum designs. But there's wiggle room between safe-and-minimal and safe-and-belt-and-braces. What you should do: Ask your engineer why each recommendation is needed. "Is this required for safety, Building Regulations, or best practice?" There's a difference. Best practice recommendations should be optional and quoted separately.

5. Your Project Probably Doesn't Need Half the Specialist Reports They're Suggesting

Architects sometimes recommend:

Arboricultural surveys (even if no trees are near the extension)

Phase 1 Environmental assessments (even for straightforward residential work)

Flood risk assessments (even outside flood zones)

Contaminated land reports (even on normal residential sites)

These sound professional and thorough. They're also £300-1,500 each.

The honest truth: most councils don't ask for these unless there's a specific trigger (e.g., you're in a flood zone, the site was previously industrial, there are protected trees).

Reality: Recommending these reports before the council asks is like buying car insurance you don't need. What you should do: Ask "Has the council specifically requested this, or are you recommending it as best practice?" Best practice recommendations should be optional, not included in the base fee.

What You Actually MUST Have

Here's the non-negotiable list for planning permission:

1. Existing site plan (measurements of your current house) 2. Proposed plans (the design you're applying for) 3. Elevations (side views showing how it looks from outside) 4. Site location plan (your address on a map) 5. Design and Access Statement (written explanation of your choices) 6. Building Regulations drawings (structural, if any structural work)

Everything else is optional. Some projects need more (listed buildings, complex sites), but most straightforward extensions need exactly this list.

An architect billing you for anything beyond this without council request is padding.

The Honest Conversation You Should Have

When meeting with an architect, ask these questions:

1. "What's included in your base fee, and what's optional extras?" 2. "Has the council asked for any specialist reports, or are these your recommendations?" 3. "Can we do a pre-application consultation first to confirm the design approach?" 4. "What if we simplified the design to fit permitted development limits - would that reduce the cost?" 5. "Who is the structural engineer, and what's their typical scope for this project?"

If they get defensive or try to justify why you "need" every service they offer, that's a sign they're optimising for fees, not your interests.

The One Thing They're Right About: You Usually DO Need Someone

That said, attempting to prepare planning-quality drawings yourself without experience usually backfires. Councils reject amateur submissions or request so many revisions that you end up paying an architect anyway (just after wasting time).

The right approach: hire an architect if planning permission is genuinely needed OR if you want custom design. But don't hire one if you're in permitted development territory.

The Uncomfortable Truth

The industry incentive is to maximise billable services. An architect who confidently says "You don't need planning permission - here's how to proceed with just Building Regulations" is turning away potential work.

An architect who says "Let's do a full pre-application consultation first" is being honest, not profitable.

This doesn't mean architects are dishonest. Most are professional and ethical. But you should approach the relationship with eyes open: they profit from more services, more fees, more complexity.

Your job is to push back on anything that doesn't have clear justification.

---

Want a second opinion? Use PlanCheck to understand if your project actually needs planning permission and what path makes sense before you commit to architect fees. Get your initial assessment free.