Why Drawings Aren't Enough: The Hidden Risk of Under-Designing
- Edward Acres
- Oct 9
- 3 min read
“If I had a pound for every time a client said ‘We’ve got drawings already,’ I’d have built my own villa by now.”
But here’s the truth: drawings aren’t the product.
Drawings are just a by-product of thinking, planning, risk management, and problem solving.
In this blog, I’m going to explain why drawings alone are never enough to build from — and what you’re risking if you treat them like they are.
Because if you’re relying on undercooked drawings to steer a million-pound build, you’re not saving money. You’re setting yourself up for chaos.
Drawings are not Design
There’s a myth that drawings = design. That if you’ve got floor plans, elevations, and a few sections, the job is done.
But let me be clear: drawings are just the visible surface of a far more complex process.
Great architecture — and safe, buildable, profitable buildings — depend on:
Coordination between structure, M&E, and envelope
Clear tolerances
Fire strategy
Access and maintenance planning
Material junctions
Service runs and clash avoidance
Contractual clarity
Drawings alone don’t guarantee any of that. In fact, they can give a false sense of security.
You think the job is 80% done.
In reality, it might not even be halfway.
What under-design looks like
Let me show you what under-design looks like in the real world:
🧱 Example 1:The brick cladding you’ve chosen isn’t compatible with the insulation spec or structural grid — but nobody spotted that because the sections were generic.
🔌 Example 2:The mechanical plant is too large for the risers shown on plan — because nobody coordinated M&E properly after planning.
🪜 Example 3:The stair design complies with building regs — but doesn’t fit the fire strategy route because smoke venting was never considered.
All of these problems lead to:
Late-stage rework
Programme delays
Spiralling costs
On-site redesign (which is 10x more expensive)
And this is where developers lose the most money — not because of construction mistakes, but because of underdeveloped design.
Why this keeps happening
So why do so many projects suffer from this?
Reason 1: Planning drawings are treated like construction drawings. But they’re not. They’re about form, scale, context — not buildability.
Reason 2: Developers and clients rush to site to “save time” — but skip detailed design stages to do it.
Reason 3: Contractors price based on assumptions — and build based on guesswork. They’re not the bad guys. They’re filling in the blanks that the design team never completed.
And guess who pays for that?
You. The client. Every time.
The Role of the Architect in Full Design
This is where the architect’s value is completely misunderstood.
We’re not just here to make it look nice.
We’re here to:
Coordinate every single consultant’s input
Turn a planning scheme into a buildable system
Spot risks before they show up on site
Write the specs that protect you legally and contractually
Ensure that what’s built is what you paid for — not a compromised mess
Drawings alone can’t do that.
A skilled architect can.
If you’re serious about delivering a high-value building with minimal surprises — don’t settle for drawings. Demand design leadership.
To sum up...
So next time someone tells you they’ve “already got drawings” — ask them this:
Who coordinated the structure?
Who checked the fire strategy?
Who’s handling the risk register?
Who owns the spec?
Who’s protecting the client?
Because if the answer is “no one” — you don’t have a design.
Comments