Architect or Building Designer
In today’s day and age where disciplines overlap and the technical and social definitions have become somewhat blurred it’s easy to become confused as to who does what.
The difference between the two is in the social perception. Very often the individual can be both architect & building designer.
Social convention places the architect above that of the building designer but the truth be known a building designer is often sought to interpret the client/developer’s wishes as to the nature of the building to be constructed.
The architect can be said to be creative in a technical sense and dislikes boundaries being set whereas the designer tends to work within boundaries as defined by the client, easier.
This is why collaboration between the architect and building designer, on large projects, is more rewarding to the client however as mentioned previously, one practitioner can be capable of doing both.
The client is often guided by the individual’s historical works, and creative proposal.
In the case of a dwelling, some would say the focus of the architect is more in the edifice, whereas that of the building designer is more inclined to the practical use of the building, the livability as it were.
Having said that, the architects input as regards to the nature of the fittings and fixtures re specifications is a distinct advantage particularly where quality is sought to be preserved,
In the end it becomes a personal preference based on objective goals with the end result being whether you prefer hanging Gauguin or Matisse on your walls.
On casual assessment it has been noted that developers tend to stay with a building designer, on a greater no of builds, than with an architect.