Introduction
One of the first questions people ask me is “How do architects charge for their work?”
It’s a fair question — and one that’s worth understanding before you compare proposals or choose who to work with. The goal of this post is to help you clearly understand the three most common fee models before you make a decision — so you can select the approach that aligns with your project goals, budget, and the kind of working relationship you want with your architect.
In this post, I’ll walk you through the three most common ways architects set their fees for residential projects: Hourly Fee, Fixed Fee, and Percentage of Construction Cost. I’ll explain how each works in general, along with the pros and cons for clients. And I’ll also share which methods I use in my own practice — and why.
Why Budget Alignment Comes First
Whatever the fee structure, the central challenge in any home project is aligning the design with your construction budget — and keeping them in harmony despite the quickly shifting nature of today’s construction market. Many clients begin with expectations shaped by older pricing that no longer applies.
Part of my role is to help balance your goals with the evolving realities of the market. From the earliest design stages, I keep your construction budget in view, drawing on my experience with current building costs to ground our decisions. Before committing significant time and resources to detailed Construction Documents (CDs), I strongly recommend — and often insist — that we confirm feasibility with preliminary cost estimates from qualified builders. This step is essential for protecting both the integrity of the design and your investment, ensuring we can make informed adjustments before moving forward.
1. Hourly Fee
How it works (in general):
With hourly billing, you’re charged for the actual time the architect spends on your project. This offers maximum flexibility — you can engage an architect for as much or as little time as needed, and the scope can grow or shrink without renegotiating a fixed agreement.
Hourly billing is often used for the following:
- Early-stage consulting or feasibility studies
- Very small projects or limited design tasks
- Situations where the scope is unclear or may change significantly
Pros (general):
- Flexible and adaptable to changing needs
- Ideal for exploratory work or targeted help
- No commitment to a full project agreement
Considerations (general):
- For complex projects, the total cost can be less predictable
- Requires a strong level of trust in the architect’s time management and transparency
My approach:
I use hourly billing for feasibility studies and small projects. It’s an honest way to explore possibilities without committing to a full design process. I keep careful records and provide regular updates so you always know where things stand. For larger projects, I move toward a price range for greater clarity and budgeting confidence.
2. Fixed Fee (or Price Range)
How it works (in general):
In a fixed fee model, you agree to pay a set amount for the agreed services. This is usually based on a detailed proposal outlining what’s included — and what’s not. It’s straightforward but assumes the project scope will stay largely the same.
When it’s often used:
- New homes, renovations, or additions
- Projects with a well-defined scope from the outset
- Clients who value predictability in budgeting
Pros (general):
- Predictable budgeting
- Easy to explain and track
- Encourages efficient progress within the agreed-upon parameters
Considerations (general):
- Less flexible if major changes arise
- Requires clear scope and decisions early on
My approach:
Rather than a single fixed number, I almost always use a price range for medium and large projects. This acknowledges that even new construction has unknowns — and renovations often have more than we expect. From the beginning of design, I work with your construction budget in mind, drawing on my experience with current building costs to keep us grounded. Before moving into the detailed Construction Documents phase (CDs), I strongly advise that we get preliminary cost estimates from builders. This ensures the design aligns with your budget and provides an opportunity to fine-tune the design so it more closely matches your goals for both lifestyle and budget planning.
A price range protects both sides — you avoid paying for “contingency padding” you may never use, and I’m not forced to compromise service quality if the unexpected happens.
3. Percentage of Construction Cost
How it works (in general):
In this model, the architect’s fee is a percentage of the project’s total construction cost — often 8–15% for residential work. The percentage is set up front, but the actual dollar amount depends on the final or estimated construction cost.
This method is common for full-service projects where the architect is deeply involved from early design through construction. It naturally scales with the size and complexity of the work.
Pros (general):
- Scales with project complexity and construction investment
- Encourages a consistent level of service from design through completion
- Aligns well with a full-service approach, from design to construction overview
Considerations (general):
- The final fee can change if construction costs rise
- Requires clear agreement on what’s included in “construction cost”
- Demands proactive, ongoing dialogue about scope and budget adjustments
- Can create a perception — fair or not — that higher construction costs benefit the architect
My approach:
I do not use this model in my practice. In my view, fees should be directly tied to the scope of architectural work, not the fluctuating cost of materials or labor. This choice comes down to two key advantages:
- Direct correspondence between service and fee – The work you’re paying for directly reflects the scope of architectural services provided, so you know exactly what you’re getting for your investment.
- No entanglement with construction costs – Separating fees from construction pricing avoids even the possibility of a conflict where more expensive materials or methods could increase my fee.
For me, a scope-based price range offers greater transparency, fairness, and alignment with your goals — both in terms of budget and in how you want to live in your home.
Closing Thoughts
Understanding these three fee structures will help you compare proposals and choose an approach that supports both your budget and your preferred way of working with your architect.
In my practice, I use hourly billing for smaller or exploratory projects and price ranges for medium and large projects — always with the aim of keeping the process clear, fair, and closely aligned with your goals.
This is Part 1 of a two-part series. In Part 2, I’ll share typical fee amounts, ballpark ranges for different project types, and explain what you’re really investing in when you hire an architect.