I am going to echo what @Matt Devincenzo alluded to. @Daniel Bryant
If you are not an Architect or in the industry, it's likely there was more time and energy spent to achieve the schematic design they came to. Additionally the Architect is building upon what was gathered in the prior phase from the township. I think this pricing is fair and on par with what I would expect. You should also remember, you aren't just paying for their time but also their expertise and experience. Without either of those they may take a lot longer (but this would be a bad thing) and could give you a design which is not well thought out, efficient or within compliance with the local Codes. @Carini Rochester alludes to this also. Knowing WHERE to look and WHAT to look for when designing is part of being a great Architect.
Those two schematic drawings could have took 20 iteration to achieve. Looking at Zoning & Codes for: setbacks, easements, egress, accessibility, max height, max density, max open space, parking, site access, traffic access, utility location, environmental impacts, green building strategies, site orientation, optimal MEP systems locations... I could go on. All of this goes through most Architect's heads in schematic design.
It's like if you went to 3 car mechanics who each charged you $50 and spent an hour working but none could fix your problem. But then to you found a knowledgeable mechanic who charged you $200 but solved the problem in 10 mins, would you be mad about what you spent? He had the expertise to know what to do. (Not a perfect example but I think it hits the point.)
Architects typically charge based on the project location, size and complexity. Most projects are not the same (unless duplicate construction like a subdivision/cookie cutter houses). If you were accepting of the contract scope of work and fee before starting, then it looks like the Architect is performing well and meeting their end of the bargain.
Jared W. Smith, RA - Principal Architect at Architect Owl PLLC