Homeowners planning loft conversions, extensions or conservatories could face higher costs if Labour introduces a rule requiring qualified architects to sign off on all planning applications.
The proposal would make it harder for homeowners to rely on architectural technicians, designers, or self-drawn plans for smaller projects, potentially adding both cost and bureaucracy.
Architects argue the requirement would improve design and safety standards, while ministers stress that no formal policy has yet been confirmed and a consultation on built environment professions will take place first.
What it could mean for homeowners
If adopted, the proposal would mean anyone applying for planning permission for an extension would need to show that a qualified architect has been formally engaged.
Many homeowners currently use architectural technicians, designers, or even produce self-drawn plans for smaller projects such as single-storey rear extensions.
Hiring an architect can add to costs, with fees typically based on a percentage of total construction costs. According to the HomeOwners Alliance, architects in the UK generally charge 3%–15% of total construction costs, depending on the size, complexity and scope of services.
For smaller projects, architects may offer fixed fees, sometimes running to a few thousand pounds for planning-only services or drawings.
RR Architecture, a UK-based firm, notes that fees vary widely – larger or complex projects are more likely to be charged as a percentage of construction costs, while simpler work may be fixed-fee.
Housing expert Samuel Hughes of the Centre for Policy Studies criticised the proposals: “This rule could add extra costs for homeowners without guaranteeing better design outcomes.”
Why architects support the change
Architects and industry bodies argue that the rule would prevent unqualified individuals from carrying out complex work, which can lead to safety issues and poor design.
One industry source told The Architects’ Journal: “Without protection of function, we’re seeing design and technical coordination at critical stages being diluted by unqualified individuals, leading to poor outcomes and unnecessary risk.”
Supporters also note that many European countries regulate architectural work more strictly, and the proposal would bring UK standards closer in line with international practice. Representatives from the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) argue that the benefits in safety and design quality justify the additional costs.
What will happen next?
The Government has stressed that no decision has been made. Ministers confirmed that a “call for evidence” on built environment professions will take place later this year, inviting input from industry groups, councils and homeowners.
Critics, including Samuel Hughes of the Centre for Policy Studies, warn that the measure could disproportionately affect small extension projects and household budgets.
Proponents, represented by sources from RIBA, argue that the benefits in design quality and public safety justify the additional cost. However, any formal policy would follow the consultation and a period of analysis of responses.
