My advice would be to not take the job.
There are problem clients, I have learned this the hard way. You should avoid them at all costs, it is not worth it.
This sounds like a problem client and you are not saying anything to make me believe that their claims against the original architect are valid or that they won't have the same unreasonable expectation of you.
If budget is the issue, then the scope would need to be substantially reduced in order to resolve that problem. In which case your drawings would likely be very different from theirs. If they have adjusted their budget to build the full scope then why not continue to work with the original architect? It sounds like they have unreasonable expectations, they don't have the money to build the scope they want. There is nothing you can do to change that, you do not control construction costs. Why would you think the outcome will be any different?
More and more, I find that clients have unreasonable expectations. I blame HGTV and all of the other DIY/Building project shows. I can't tell you how many times clients have said 'but they did it in 2 days on TV...'. Everyone thinks they can be their own designer, and they have no sense of costs. They want what they want, and they think they should just be able to do it. They do not listen, but will not hesitate to blame you when they have insisted on a bad choice.
Sadly, architects no longer occupy a position of authority. Too many clients will listen to realtors, contractors, interior decorators, even the shelf stocker at Home Depot before listening to the advice of their architect. It is a serious problem. Architects need to start advocating for our role or we will become completely obsolete. The first step is to not undermine each other when a project goes badly. I had this happen to me last year when an architect was brought in as an owner's rep. late on a project due to serious problems resulting from unauthorized contractor changes. He wanted the work so he drove a wedge between the client and I, telling me that he agreed with me while telling the client that I was wrong. I was forced to walk away due to the resulting life safety issues. He took over the project and in the end the client was forced to correct all of the non-compliant work anyway. It was the most unethical experience I have had.
Do yourself a favor and walk away. If not, I would at least recommend reaching out to the other architect to hear what they have to say before agreeing to anything.
------------------------------
Cheryl Noel AIA
Wrap Architecture, Inc.
Chicago IL
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 05-18-2018 17:43
From: Thomas Ahleman
Subject: Working with a client who has fired another architect
We were asked to provide a proposal to a church that just fired a design-build firm. The drawings were taken through CD's and permit comments-no permit was issued. The church provided proof that they terminated the previous firm for gross underestimation in their original construction budget. I mades sure they had terminated their previous contract before having a second conversation. (Ethics). The project is modifying existing classroom spaces to accommodate a Montessori school tenant. There are not a lot of different ways to skin this cat from a planning point of view. But I'm concerned that if the original architect has retained the rights to the drawings, that any architect that comes next (maybe me) would be stepping on their IP toes. I wouldn't want to get into a spitting contest as to whether or not our proposed design is "different enough" from the original design. It seems like the only clean way forward is for the church to 'buy' the rights to the ideas in the previous architects drawings. The thing is there is really only one way anyeone could create a plan that accommoates the number of classrooms needed anyway. Anyone ever have a similar situation?
--
Thomas Ahleman AIA, LEED AP
Principal
Studio Talo Architecture, Inc.
1234 Sherman Ave. Suite 202
Evanston, IL 60202
c 773.620.7232
o 847.733.7300