INDEPENDENT JUDGEMENT ON WHETHER YOUR LAYOUT WILL WORK BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE TO CHANGE IT
When the plan looks right but something feels off
Most of the decisions that determine how a home works are made early, quickly, and without full information. They are also the hardest, and often the most expensive, to undo.
Design Advisory tests whether a residential layout will genuinely work, and whether the decisions behind it will stand up over time. It is for anyone who wants an experienced, independent view before committing.
What you get
The focus is the plan itself: how a home functions in everyday use, from movement and storage to light and the way spaces relate to one another over time.
The output is a set of annotated plans identifying where a layout works well, where friction or inefficiency is likely to appear, and which decisions may prove difficult or expensive to change.
Where trade-offs require explanation, written notes are included, but the emphasis is always on clear, direct feedback on the plans themselves.
When to use it
Design Advisory is most effective at early and mid-design stages, when layouts are flexible and key decisions have yet to be fixed.
It is commonly used to test early layouts before planning is submitted, sense-check schemes prepared by others, identify risks before committing to construction, or clarify where effort and budget should be focused.
The aim is not to redesign your project, but to ensure the decisions being made are the right ones.
Fees and next steps
Fees start from £5,000 + VAT, reflecting the time and focus required to review layouts properly.
Design Advisory can be commissioned as a standalone service or as the first stage of full project management. The review provides a foundation of shared understanding that makes the transition to full involvement straightforward.
To discuss your project and whether Design Advisory would be useful, please get in touch with a brief outline of where you currently are.
Top image and below:
Green Roof Cottages, Blackheath
Two identical houses, two contrasting design strategies.
In the first, we introduced a mezzanine level, compromising the virtue of the original architectural lines in favour of additional usable space. It sold almost immediately.
The second house retained its cleaner form but remained on the market. In response, we installed a mezzanine there as well. Once completed, it too sold quickly.
The lesson is clear: function drives value. Prioritising how a space works for everyday life will often outweigh abstract notions of architectural merit.
