2 Engineering Quotes - 2 Very different prices

FortunaMan

I recently got quotes off two engineers for the below list of services. Exact same job but two very different prices as one came in at 5k and the other 9k. Seems a big difference to me and was just wondering what the norm is for this type of service. I am actually considering going for the higher quote after having met both. The cheaper priced option actually did not fill me with confidence regarding his knowledge of the planning process which is slightly worrying. If it helps I am building a 1800sq ft two story in Galway.

Planning;
Preparation of Plans elevations Sections/meeting with Planners for pre planning meeting if deemed necessary;
Preparation of EPA site Characterisation report for Planning
Preparation of map and site layout for planning including levels;
Trial Hole excavation to be paid for by Clients;
Advertisement and submission for Planning permission
Reply to further information as necessary

Supervision;
Preparation of foundation drawings and schedule
Preparation of Construction Drawings/details
Preparation of part L Compliance (by others) BER( usually €300-350)
Submission of Commencement Notice to
include schedule of Drawings Certificates and details ;
Inspections as follows;
Pre Start up
Foundations x2
Blockwork x2
Roof x2
First Fix, Second Fix
Percolation area x2
Final inspection and submission of signed off documents

Gumbo

The €5k quote sounds very cheap, like suspiciously cheap for the services been provided.

mickdw

opt out or not?

Calahonda52

A lot of fuzz, noise and uncertainty in the above.

What is not clear is who is doing the rest of the professional stuff.

Who is doing the consultation in terms of what might be the optimum design for the house visa vis the site and how that meets you needs.?
While you might go with the 9k, it still might not give you what you expect or in fact need.

It would help if you gave a build cost: my guess is the 9k is about 3.6% but lets see.

Its all very well talking about inspections but are there any specific targets for airtightness?

Any stage payments to be signed off?

In closing, if you are building just to Part L and no more, its a wasted opportunity.

sydthebeat

engineers designing your house?

perhaps the difference in price is reflected by the engineers ability to design?

Calahonda52

sydthebeat wrote: »

engineers designing your house?

perhaps the difference in price is reflected by the engineers ability to design?

That is one of the points that I am trying to elucidate, perhaps too tersely:)

sydthebeat

Calahonda52 wrote: »

That is one of the points that I am trying to elucidate, perhaps too tersely:)

i shoot from the hip

FortunaMan

Thanks for the feedback guys. I suppose I was under the impression(maybe naively so) that an engineer was a one stop shop for all our needs. We have a very clear design concept which we have drawn up and been tweaking for over a year so basically we just need this design transferred from our amateur drawings into an official version. The build cost will be somewhere around 230k. In terms of exceeding 'Part L Compliance' of course this is something we would love to achieve but without any significant cost as our budget is stretched already.

Calahonda52

I don't know how familiar you are with the BER process but here is a link.
http://www.seai.ie/Your_Building/BER/BER_FAQ/FAQ_BER/Homeowners/BER_Cert_with_explaination.pdf
Now lets run some numbers here based on the BER.
Lets say you,
due to poor [design, detailing, execution, supervision and remediation], you get a C3 BER.
and due to
excellent [design, detailing, execution, supervision and remediation] you could have got an A1 BER

So the differential energy consumption is 200 minus 25 = 175 kWh/m2/year
The proposed gaff is 160 m2
so that gives us about 28,000 kWh/year
Let's be kind and say all in, the energy cost is 20 cents/ kWh

So C3 will cost you €5,600 per annum more in energy per annum.
So over 25 years, ignoring inflation etc, that would be €140,000.

The next piece of the puzzle is at what cost.
There are different estimates for what the additional cost would be, lets say 15%
So at the moment you are budgeting about 1600/m2 build cost

So lets add on 15%, making it €1,850/m2
260,000/1850 = 140 m2

So lose 20m2 and save €5,600 per annum.

Next up, so you have design on paper.

Before you spend either 5k or 9k, I suggest you go and by the following book
http://schoolbooks365.ie/construction_technology_hickey
Its €40, and read very carefully the chapters on site layout and house orientation and then look at the guy in the mirror and tell him you have considered all the points that are made and you are happy that the house is designed and located optimally on the site.

Keep well and good luck.

893bet

FortunaMan wrote: »

Thanks for the feedback guys. I suppose I was under the impression(maybe naively so) that an engineer was a one stop shop for all our needs. We have a very clear design concept which we have drawn up and been tweaking for over a year so basically we just need this design transferred from our amateur drawings into an official version. The build cost will be somewhere around 230k. In terms of exceeding 'Part L Compliance' of course this is something we would love to achieve but without any significant cost as our budget is stretched already.

I would suggest engaging a professional to assist with the design. I know you have a very clear idea of what you want but unless you are in the business there is much you will miss. Offer your ideas to the architect and let them offer design input on orientation, room sizes, traffic flow etc.

If you are struggling with ££ then all the more reason to engage a pro. A well designed 1800 sq house won't feel any smaller than a 2500 sq for house and wil save you lots! Go smaller!

I almost built 2600-2800 and ended up at 2200 after some advice from a chap here (Certified was his name, no longer posted sadly). Even at 2200 it is still huge! I could easily have lost another 200-400 sq feet and not noticed the space loss but felt it in the wallet!

Smaller. Cheaper build. Cheaper heat. Cheaper maintain.

madmac187

893bet wrote: »

I would suggest engaging a professional to assist with the design. I know you have a very clear idea of what you want but unless you are in the business there is much you will miss. Offer your ideas to the architect and let them offer design input on orientation, room sizes, traffic flow etc.

If you are struggling with ££ then all the more reason to engage a pro. A well designed 1800 sq house won't feel any smaller than a 2500 sq for house and wil save you lots! Go smaller!

I almost built 2600-2800 and ended up at 2200 after some advice from a chap here (Certified was his name, no longer posted sadly). Even at 2200 it is still huge! I could easily have lost another 200-400 sq feet and not noticed the space loss but felt it in the wallet!

Smaller. Cheaper build. Cheaper heat. Cheaper maintain.

Would agree with above, I used very cheap architectural tech for aesthetics, details, and planning. I didn't regret it, couldn't justify it, but I'm an engineer provided him with design but he did not want to redraw it, but only after a row and corrected him in all details of the build. Not to mention, he quoted for signing off stage payments and he didn't have the bloody indemnity for the bank. So unless you are competent with building and knowledge of practical details be sure to pick the right professional. I'm at slab level and so annoyed, I got another chap for the stage payments and I'm getting people to check quality of build when I'm not there. You don't want that, people will be sick of you quickly.

And, don't do direct labour without proper supervision, i.e. Manager to direct them. Personally, I have left it to a builder and everyone I know asked why. Funnily enough these are the people who have dreadful houses with no insulation in walls and floors, damp coming through walls and spending €3,000 a year in oil. And they all live in horrible 4000sqm houses. Enough Said!

normanbond

Slightly off topic....what should I expect to pay for architect to design 2,800sq ft 2 story house. He is also going to conduct the engineering side of the project....

Dr Turk Turkelton

madmac187 wrote: »

Would agree with above, I used very cheap architectural tech for aesthetics, details, and planning. I didn't regret it, couldn't justify it, but I'm an engineer provided him with design but he did not want to redraw it, but only after a row and corrected him in all details of the build. Not to mention, he quoted for signing off stage payments and he didn't have the bloody indemnity for the bank. So unless you are competent with building and knowledge of practical details be sure to pick the right professional. I'm at slab level and so annoyed, I got another chap for the stage payments and I'm getting people to check quality of build when I'm not there. You don't want that, people will be sick of you quickly.

And, don't do direct labour without proper supervision, i.e. Manager to direct them. Personally, I have left it to a builder and everyone I know asked why. Funnily enough these are the people who have dreadful houses with no insulation in walls and floors, damp coming through walls and spending €3,000 a year in oil. And they all live in horrible 4000sqm houses. Enough Said!

They are doing well heating a 4000sqm house for only €3k a year I would have thought?

Gumbo

normanbond wrote: »

Slightly off topic....what should I expect to pay for architect to design 2,800sq ft 2 story house. He is also going to conduct the engineering side of the project....

Is he an Architect or an Engineer or both?

normanbond

kceire wrote: »

Is he an Architect or an Engineer or both?

He's both....

madmac187

Dr Turk Turkelton wrote: »

They are doing well heating a 4000sqm house for only €3k a year I would have thought?

Mate that's 5000ltrs of oil are you mad? Thats 14ltrs of oil a day over 365 days a year. Realistically oil would run say 7 months of the year, thats 24ltrs a day very roughly. So I think thats madness. Parents house is approx 2400sqft and costs €800 a year in oil and its warm. Thats approx 1200ltrs of oil, which is roughly a tank and a fifth.

Does anyone agree or disagree with me ?

Dr Turk Turkelton

madmac187 wrote: »

Mate that's 5000ltrs of oil are you mad? Thats 14ltrs of oil a day over 365 days a year. Realistically oil would run say 7 months of the year, thats 24ltrs a day very roughly. So I think thats madness. Parents house is approx 2400sqm and costs €800 a year in oil and its warm. Thats approx 1200ltrs of oil, which is roughly a tank and a fifth.

Does anyone agree or disagree with me ?

2400sqm for €800 a year?
They must live on a Caribbean island?
Are you confusing square metres and square feet by any chance?
If not that's some serious houses in your family.

madmac187

You are right sq ft not sqm

paddysdream

Calahonda52 wrote: »

I don't know how familiar you are with the BER process but here is a link.
http://www.seai.ie/Your_Building/BER/BER_FAQ/FAQ_BER/Homeowners/BER_Cert_with_explaination.pdf
Now lets run some numbers here based on the BER.
Lets say you,
due to poor [design, detailing, execution, supervision and remediation], you get a C3 BER.
and due to
excellent [design, detailing, execution, supervision and remediation] you could have got an A1 BER

So the differential energy consumption is 200 minus 25 = 175 kWh/m2/year
The proposed gaff is 160 m2
so that gives us about 28,000 kWh/year
Let's be kind and say all in, the energy cost is 20 cents/ kWh

So C3 will cost you €5,600 per annum more in energy per annum.
So over 25 years, ignoring inflation etc, that would be €140,000.

The next piece of the puzzle is at what cost.
There are different estimates for what the additional cost would be, lets say 15%
So at the moment you are budgeting about 1600/m2 build cost

So lets add on 15%, making it €1,850/m2
260,000/1850 = 140 m2

So lose 20m2 and save €5,600 per annum.

Next up, so you have design on paper.

Before you spend either 5k or 9k, I suggest you go and by the following book
http://schoolbooks365.ie/construction_technology_hickey
Its €40, and read very carefully the chapters on site layout and house orientation and then look at the guy in the mirror and tell him you have considered all the points that are made and you are happy that the house is designed and located optimally on the site.

Keep well and good luck.

Probably off topic but would love to know where you get your figures re. heating(energy consumption)from.Looking at the amounts quoted the figures involved seem ridicolous to be honest.
To think that an 180m house would/could cost 5600 in total to heat per year ,let alone that much extra is a bit of a stretch to be fair.
A 20 year old 1900 sq feet house here,insulated and finished to the minimum spec at the time and costs 750 a year in kero to heat with another 200 in coal,which is more for the effect rather than any realistic heating.
Oil is used for all hot water,showers etc as immersion never been switched on and only power showers used ie no electric showers.Thats for 2 adults and two children.
On your figures an A rated house must be actually creating money or contributing to global warming.

Calahonda52

paddysdream wrote: »

Probably off topic but would love to know where you get your figures re. heating(energy consumption)from.Looking at the amounts quoted the figures involved seem ridicolous to be honest.
To think that an 180m house would/could cost 5600 in total to heat per year ,let alone that much extra is a bit of a stretch to be fair.
A 20 year old 1900 sq feet house here,insulated and finished to the minimum spec at the time and costs 750 a year in kero to heat with another 200 in coal,which is more for the effect rather than any realistic heating.
Oil is used for all hot water,showers etc as immersion never been switched on and only power showers used ie no electric showers.Thats for 2 adults and two children.
On your figures an A rated house must be actually creating money or contributing to global warming.

http://www.seai.ie/Your_Building/BER/Your_Guide_to_Building_Energy_Rating.pdf
Sets out the concept behind a BER and it very clearly states that:

A BER is only an indication of the energy performance of a home, similar to the concept of a fuel economy (miles per gallon or litres per 100km) rating for a car.

The basis of the math is in the pdf

So like a car it depends on how the house is used.

The purpose of my math was to show that it pays to build to as good a rating as possible if looked at from a life time cost analysis, which is the only correct way to do it.

The fact that you responded and pi$$ed in on it is wonderful progress as at least the eyes did not glaze over like with most folk.:D

Keep well and Happy whatever takes your fancy.

ps whats the elec bill in your figures

paddysdream

Calahonda52 wrote: »

http://www.seai.ie/Your_Building/BER/Your_Guide_to_Building_Energy_Rating.pdf
Sets out the concept behind a BER and it very clearly states that:

A BER is only an indication of the energy performance of a home, similar to the concept of a fuel economy (miles per gallon or litres per 100km) rating for a car.

The basis of the math is in the pdf

So like a car it depends on how the house is used.

The purpose of my math was to show that it pays to build to as good a rating as possible if looked at from a life time cost analysis, which is the only correct way to do it.

The fact that you responded and pi$$ed in on it is wonderful progress as at least the eyes did not glaze over like with most folk.:D

Keep well and Happy whatever takes your fancy.

ps whats the elec bill in your figures

Not disagreeing with the theory but using theoretical figures for heating and comparing/contrasting to real world figures for the cost of the engineering quotes is a tad misleading.
Regarding my elec. bill;just had a look at this years and am paying 75 a month standing order ie 900 a year and am about 100 in credit at the moment so 800 a year to cover standing charge,windmill tax, vat and usage which includes pumping water to 3 cattle troughs probably 8 months of the year.Mixture of a few energy savers,mostly normal bulbs with outside leds back and front.

Anyways is what you are saying is that BER is only a theory and not actually relevant in real world costs?Genuine question.
Regarding the "build a good rating"Grand idea but spending another 20/30k to maybe save a few euro strikes me as rather foolish.

Save

BryanF

paddysdream wrote: »

Anyways is what you are saying is that BER is only a theory and not actually relevant in real world costs?Genuine question.
Regarding the "build a good rating"Grand idea but spending another 20/30k to maybe save a few euro strikes me as rather foolish.

Save

As was already explained to you, it's the house that's assessed, not the occupant. occupant home co2/energy usage/behaviour is hard to study: quantify, or predict! I have tried, it's extremely difficult!

The renewable requirements are covered under building regulations. The BER is a tool to show compliance with part L of the building regulations. The purpose of 'build a good rating', as you put it, is to lower the on-going co2 emissions for new builds, to go some small way to helping us meet Ireland's climate change obligations.

paddysdream

BryanF wrote: »

As was already explained to you, it's the house that's assessed, not the occupant. occupant home co2/energy usage/behaviour is hard to study: quantify, or predict! I have tried, it's extremely difficult!

The renewable requirements are covered under building regulations. The BER is a tool to show compliance with part L of the building regulations. The purpose of 'build a good rating', as you put it, is to lower the on-going co2 emissions for new builds, to go some small way to helping us meet Ireland's climate change obligations.

Not to drag it any more off topic but that kind confirms my point ie it was rather pointless to use a theory(ber rating) etc to counter a real life question of money.
Ireland's climate change obligations are all fine and well as an idea but how many would throw away a few thousand here and now on a "concept" ?

Its really the outlandish figures that caught my attention as anyone purporting to give advice and seeing nothing wrong with stating figures of a saving alone of over 5k a year on energy costs in a rather modest family home because it has, on paper, a better design should really know better.