How to Work With an Architect on a Renovation in Romania: What You Need to Prepare

A renovation brief is the document that determines whether your architect can design something useful. It defines scope, encodes constraints, and gives the design process a fixed point to depart from. Most clients in Romania arrive at a first architect meeting without one — with a mood board, a rough budget figure they're reluctant to share, and a list of things they'd like the space to feel like.

That is not a brief. This article covers what a brief actually needs to contain, how to build one before you engage an architect, and what to expect from the collaboration once you do.

What information does an architect need before design can begin?

Before any design work is possible, your architect needs a clear picture of the property's legal and physical status. That means the cadastral number, intabulation confirmation, and any existing plans — even partial or outdated ones are useful. If the property is a listed building or located within a protected zone under Legea 422/2001, that needs to be on the table from the first conversation, because it shapes everything from permitted interventions to approval timelines.

Beyond the property itself, the architect needs to understand how you intend to use it. A brief for a primary residence is not the same document as a brief for a short-term rental or a resale renovation. The occupancy intent determines the functional priorities, the finish level, the systems specification, and ultimately the budget logic. Clients who leave this unresolved — "we're not sure yet whether we'll live in it or rent it" — produce briefs that satisfy neither use case well.

Hard constraints belong in the brief from the start: a lease expiry date that sets a completion deadline, a planning condition, a co-ownership agreement that restricts certain interventions. These are not details to share later — they are design parameters.

How do you move from "I want to renovate" to a scope definition?

Scope definition is the process of converting a general intention into a specific, bounded project. It is not design — it precedes design. The confusion between the two is one of the most consistent sources of wasted time in renovation projects.

A scoping conversation with an architect typically covers: which spaces are being touched, which are not, whether the structural layout is fixed or open to change, and which systems — electrical, plumbing, heating — are being replaced versus retained. The output is not a set of drawings. It is an agreed list of what the project includes and, equally important, what it excludes.

The most common scope errors are directional opposites. Some clients over-specify too early — arriving with finish selections and furniture layouts before anyone has assessed whether the existing structure will support what they want. Others under-specify functional requirements — they know they want the kitchen "opened up" but haven't decided how many people need to cook simultaneously, whether there's a need for a separate utility space, or how the kitchen relates to the dining area. Both errors produce the same result: a brief the architect can't use.

A good architect will push back on both. If they don't, that's a signal.

What existing condition documentation is required before design can begin?

The relevé — a measured survey of the existing property — is the baseline document for any renovation. It records floor areas, ceiling heights, wall thicknesses, window and door positions, and structural elements. Without it, drawings are approximations. Depending on the architect and the complexity of the project, the relevé may be included within the design engagement or priced as a separate preliminary phase.

Structural assessment is a separate matter. According to DTZ Echinox data based on INS figures, approximately 89% of Romania's housing stock — across a total of around 8.9 million units — predates 1990. For properties in that category, a structural engineer should assess the building before design begins. The structural assessment determines what can be moved, removed, or modified, and whether the building requires consolidation works that need to be sequenced before fit-out.

Utility mapping is the third documentation layer and the most frequently neglected. The condition of the electrical panel, the age and routing of plumbing, the presence or absence of gas, the drainage configuration — these are not details to discover during construction. Unknown systems are a brief risk: they produce scope changes mid-project, which produce cost increases, which produce client-architect friction. A basic utility assessment before the brief is written eliminates a category of problem.

How should a client frame their budget in a brief?

State it. This is the single most consistent piece of advice that clients ignore and later regret.

Budget is a design constraint. An architect who doesn't know your budget cannot make informed decisions about structural interventions versus cosmetic ones, about specifying custom joinery versus off-the-shelf, about which systems to replace fully and which to patch. Withholding the budget in the belief that it produces a better negotiating position produces worse design — a proposal calibrated to an imaginary number that is never quite right.

The most useful framing is a range with a hard ceiling: "We are comfortable spending between X and Y, and we will not go above Z." That gives the architect room to design toward quality rather than just toward a number, while establishing a genuine constraint. A single figure with no range signals either that the client hasn't thought it through, or that the figure is aspirational rather than real.

Phasing is the legitimate alternative when the full scope exceeds the available budget. It means designing the complete project now — so that phase 2 is accounted for in the structural decisions, the utility routes, and the spatial logic of phase 1 — and building it in stages as budget allows. The critical point: phasing must be designed in from the start. Project management and site costs — the overhead of running an active construction site — typically account for 10 to 20% of construction cost. Those costs are incurred again with each new phase if the project isn't conceived as a whole from the outset. A phase 2 retrofitted onto a phase 1 that wasn't designed to receive it doesn't just cost more in construction terms; it costs more before a single tool is picked up.

What decisions should a client make before the first meeting — and which should wait?

Three decisions should be made before you walk into a first architect consultation. First, occupancy intent — how the space will be used, by whom, and for how long. Second, non-negotiable spatial requirements — the specific functional needs that the design must satisfy regardless of layout. Third, timeline — a realistic completion target and any fixed constraints that affect it.

Everything else is design territory. Layout, material palette, finish level, the specific resolution of any spatial problem — these are questions the design process is built to answer. Clients who arrive with a fully resolved layout are not bringing useful input. They are bringing a solution to a problem the architect hasn't been allowed to examine.

The brief that constrains design well defines requirements, not solutions. "We need the kitchen to function independently from the living area during large gatherings" is a requirement. "We want an island with a breakfast bar and pendant lighting over it" is a solution. The first opens design space. The second closes it before the architect has had any input. Both may end up in the same place — but only the first produces a design the architect can stand behind.

What should a client expect at each stage — and what questions reveal whether the architect is the right fit?

A standard renovation engagement in Romania moves through the following stages: brief confirmation, concept design, developed design, technical project (the documentation required for building permit and execution), and site supervision. Not every project requires all stages, and not every architect offers all of them — but you should know which stages your contract covers before you sign it.

Fee structures vary. The OAR maintains a Cost Information System (SIC), published in the Official Gazette in April 2022, which provides a framework for calculating fees — but it is explicitly non-mandatory, and fees are market-negotiated between client and architect. Lump sum agreements are common on defined-scope projects; percentage-based fees are more typical where scope may evolve. Either model is reasonable — the question is whether the scope of services is clearly defined within it.

Three questions worth asking at a first consultation. One: how do you handle scope changes during design and during construction? A good answer describes a process — a written change order, a revised fee, a documented decision. A vague answer ("we'll figure it out as we go") is a cost risk. Two: who produces the construction documents, and are they included in your fee? On many projects, technical documentation is subcontracted or priced separately. Know this before you proceed. Three: do you supervise on site, and if so, at what frequency? Site supervision is where design intent either survives construction or doesn't. An architect who designs but doesn't supervise is handing off the most consequential part of the process.

A well-prepared client doesn't do the architect's job. They make the collaboration worth having — by arriving with the right information, holding the right decisions open, and asking the questions that reveal whether the person across the table can actually deliver. The brief is where that starts.

If you're planning a renovation in Romania and want to work through your brief before committing to a full engagement, Office Hours is a good starting point — a focused consultation before you commit to anything.