Structural Fee for Auditorium Design 10

[McSEpllc]

Hi Everyone,
I am trying to find a fair fee for structural design and CAD for a stand-along auditorium project with a construction value of $6,000,000. The Architect told me the total design fee he is charging the client.
With this particular Architect I have been working mostly on schools, and this is our first auditorium. If this project were a school I would be charging 0.67% of total construction cost for structural design.
Per RS Means, structural fee should be at 1.75% of construction cost specifically for auditoriums.
The two percentages are further apart then I visualize the difference in design time.

Does anyone here have experience in structural fees for auditorium design?
Thanks!


Eric McDonald, PE
McDonald Structural Engineering, PLLC

 

[msquared48]

Depends on whether this a basic or more involved auditorium. More involved would include such items as a stage with the grid work, catwalks and clouds, or even special moment frames, pile foundation, etc.

Generally, I would say 1% low and 2.5% high end... with drafting and calculations.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

 

[MikeE55]

In my market I would charge the 1%, thinking that's about the max and still be competitive. If your stage system includes the old counterbalanced system of pulleys and weights, you are in for a tough design. Hopefully, they want a more modern electrically controlled system.

 

[GregLocock]

Depends on the acoustic performance required. I once helped write an acoustic spec for a room that the contractor designed for and failed to meet. He was given the option of rectifying it or forgoing his fees, as per contract.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[Enhineyero]

Hi all, I would like to know how can engineers and architect justify the 1%-2.5% of construction cost as their fee? The reason usually thrown at me is because it is the "industry standard", hence i would like to know how did this standard come about. I hope someone, especially the more experienced engineers can give light to this.

Honestly 1% - 2.5% is quite low considering the amount of scientific knowledge, years of experience, and liability that the consultant have to bear. Then again, going against the tide in terms of fees wont get you a handful of clients, specially if there is so much competition around you.

 

[strucguy]

Enhineyero...if you think 1% is low, think of what .5% would feel like. We recently sent out a proposal for structural design of school...came up with a fee of .65% of the construction cost. The architect calls my boss and ask us to bring our fee down to .5%. I told my boss to say no...which he apparently didn't. I don't blame him. There are enough engineers out there who are ready to do just about anything to bring in new clients. The real problem is "There are too many engineers out there". Enough to force even the good engineers to bring their fee down. And the ranting continues...

 

[BAretired]

There is no easy answer to the question because percentage of construction cost is not a logical method of determining the value of structural engineering services.

Acoustic performance was mentioned above. It has nothing to do with the structural engineer, yet his fee is partially based on the cost of labor and materials required to achieve some standard of acoustic performance. What could be more ridiculous than that?



BA

 

[ron9876]

Enhineyero I agree with the 1% fee for an auditorium with a performance stage. It would go up if there is something complex like complicated seating, long span roof, etc.

Unfortunately ours is a profession based on capitalism without true regard for the quality of the work product. I have always felt that we are hurt because most people don't really understand what we do and our design is covered with some type of finish material when the project is completed.

And the realtors get 6% of the sell price. They have managed to fix their fees.This is called collusion when the engineers have tried to do that in the past.

 

[steellion]

If you can get 1.75%, more power to you. We typically get 0.4-0.6% of the construction cost for structural engineering services. Note, construction cost is only one thing we look at when determining a fee. We also factor in $/SF, complexity, history with the client, etc. Cost per square foot is probably a more accurate metric. A building could have really expensive finishes or a mechanical system that doesn't really affect your level of effort at all, why should that affect the structural consultant fee?

 

[Enhineyero]

Well I agree on most of the comments here. But it is what it is, love the work, hate the pay.

 

[dik]

I'd sit down and figgure what the scope of the work was and determine approximately how many drawings were involved and determine a fee on this basis. I would also estimate the work from the scope and determine a fee on this basis. I would then work out a fee based on 1.5% of the construction cost and compare all three fees and pick one that was close. If the fee has to be lowered, then it's a matter of 'whittling' away at the scope...

Dik

 

[IsaacStructural]

steellion, the issue I run into is not getting enough information up front. They want a proposal but won't/can't provide much information, sometimes the construction cost is the most specific piece of data I'll get before having to put out a proposal.

Licensed Structural Engineer and Licensed Professional Engineer (Illinois)

 

[strucguy]

IsaacStructural...that's where a well drafted "scope of work" comes into picture. If the Achitect wats a "Not to exceed fee" they better agree to our "scope of work". Anything beyond the agreed scope should be compensated appropriately. I feel we as engineers don't do a good job at drafting a solid "scope of work" or raising invoices for additional services. Contractors don't shy away from sending us their change orders, then why should we?

 

[JLNJ]

I agree that the scope is often tough to get your arms around and the beginning, but that's when the proposals are due. We worked on a large residence hall which started with no basement but then ended up with two basements in two buildings connected by a tunnel. Our original fee was based on (literally) a sketch on a napkin. The % fee to the architect was non-negotiable and fixed (it was a State University project) and the subconsultant fees were all fixed as well - we were a "team". What a tough project!

The architects generally work on a "whatever it takes" contract including revisions and modifications as part of the deisgn development process. The engineers are just supposed to go with the flow because the architects fee is fixed. They hold our contract - despite the conflict of interest. It's an odd system in many ways and it's a wonder it works out as well as it does as often as it does.

I have done well on < .50 % projects and I have lost my shirt on projects > 0.50 %. There is no cookie cutter formula. You can spend 75% of your fee on some crazy entry pavilion which is just 10% of the square footage and cost. Or the architect can do you a favor and design an artfully simple building with a straightforward structural system.

When I was complaining about the vagaries of the engineering which goes with commercial work, I had an architect tell me that commercial work is just plain difficult. It has its rewards and you make the business decision to get into that type of work and just take your lumps when they come.

 

[McSEpllc]

Thank you Everyone!

Your responses have helped me to see a common thread.

Eric McDonald, PE
McDonald Structural Engineering, PLLC

 

[glass99]

K-12 schools have notoriously low fees, and should not be a basis for comparison with other project types. In my neck of the woods, taking on K-12 projects is associated with having a super lean operation with no overhead and staff willing to work for low pay. Practically every other building type pays more, including single family residential, and college construction.

Please do not undersell yourself. The economy is picking and an attitude of having to eat whatever is given to you hurts the rest of us.

 

[VoyageofDiscovery]

We are all a bunch of fools!

VoD