ᐅ Experiences with Building a House Using an Architect on a Fixed-Price Contract?
Created on: 2 Dec 2018 20:01
J
jawknee
Hello everyone,
I originally planned to build with a general contractor (GC), mainly because of the financial security provided by a fixed price. When working with an architect, I was always worried about unpredictable costs or that the final costs might end up being significantly higher.
Now, through acquaintances, I was recommended a local architect who also offers a fixed price like a GC (for the complete turnkey house). The only difference is, as is typical with architects, that it’s not "all in one hand" but rather separate contracts are signed with the trades, which the architect still handles the tendering process for and coordinates later. His profit would essentially be his fixed fee minus the negotiated costs with the trades.
In the first meeting, everything seemed very professional and honest, and I had a good feeling about it. The price was also in a normal range between the lower-cost GCs and the (seemingly overpriced) GCs. He even includes some items that many GCs put under additional construction costs, such as the foundation slab, removal of earth excavation, etc. The remaining additional costs included in the fixed price were roughly estimated.
That’s why I would like to build with the architect and I have already started an initial exchange regarding the floor plan.
However, I wanted to ask if anyone has experience with this model and if there’s anything I should still watch out for? Would you also engage an independent construction supervisor when building with an architect? With a GC, I definitely would, but when working with an architect, where you generally collaborate more closely, I feel like it might come across as a lack of trust.
The only thing that still makes me a bit uncertain is that the scope of services (which would also form the contract basis) is somewhat vague in places: for example, for the masonry, "energy-saving bricks...[]...brick selection is based on thermal calculation..." or for the foundation slab, "will be dimensioned according to structural requirements...". So, unlike many GCs, it does not specify in detail the thickness of the masonry or the foundation slab. However, other parts are described more precisely, similar to GCs.
The architect said that this is often clarified further during the tendering process or by the bids from trades and that it might even be more detailed than with a GC. However, the tendering only happens after I sign the house building contract. At this point, I would have to give him a vote of confidence.
On one hand, he does make a trustworthy impression and has been working according to this model for quite some time, but on the other hand, I’m a bit cautious about giving a vote of confidence when so much money is involved.
What do you think?
I originally planned to build with a general contractor (GC), mainly because of the financial security provided by a fixed price. When working with an architect, I was always worried about unpredictable costs or that the final costs might end up being significantly higher.
Now, through acquaintances, I was recommended a local architect who also offers a fixed price like a GC (for the complete turnkey house). The only difference is, as is typical with architects, that it’s not "all in one hand" but rather separate contracts are signed with the trades, which the architect still handles the tendering process for and coordinates later. His profit would essentially be his fixed fee minus the negotiated costs with the trades.
In the first meeting, everything seemed very professional and honest, and I had a good feeling about it. The price was also in a normal range between the lower-cost GCs and the (seemingly overpriced) GCs. He even includes some items that many GCs put under additional construction costs, such as the foundation slab, removal of earth excavation, etc. The remaining additional costs included in the fixed price were roughly estimated.
That’s why I would like to build with the architect and I have already started an initial exchange regarding the floor plan.
However, I wanted to ask if anyone has experience with this model and if there’s anything I should still watch out for? Would you also engage an independent construction supervisor when building with an architect? With a GC, I definitely would, but when working with an architect, where you generally collaborate more closely, I feel like it might come across as a lack of trust.
The only thing that still makes me a bit uncertain is that the scope of services (which would also form the contract basis) is somewhat vague in places: for example, for the masonry, "energy-saving bricks...[]...brick selection is based on thermal calculation..." or for the foundation slab, "will be dimensioned according to structural requirements...". So, unlike many GCs, it does not specify in detail the thickness of the masonry or the foundation slab. However, other parts are described more precisely, similar to GCs.
The architect said that this is often clarified further during the tendering process or by the bids from trades and that it might even be more detailed than with a GC. However, the tendering only happens after I sign the house building contract. At this point, I would have to give him a vote of confidence.
On one hand, he does make a trustworthy impression and has been working according to this model for quite some time, but on the other hand, I’m a bit cautious about giving a vote of confidence when so much money is involved.
What do you think?
Nordlys schrieb:
Guys, the price can’t increase unless the client changes the scope of work. If, based on a bill of quantities prepared by an architect according to the VOB (German Construction Contract Procedures), company z offers 123,000 thousand, that’s binding. Fixed. Done.That’s nonsense. The architect wouldn’t prepare a bill of quantities before it’s certain that the project will actually be built with them.
Nordlys schrieb:
Guys, the cost cannot increase unless the end customer changes the scope of work. Or the architect has incorrectly assessed the quantities (or the ground conditions, etc.).
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Musketier schrieb:
That’s nonsense. The architect doesn’t put the project out to tender before it’s clear that he will actually be involved in the construction. He doesn’t need to, because he apparently has fixed unit prices agreed with certain companies. This way, if he calculates correctly, he knows what the house he designed will cost. When client X decides to proceed, he can provide a fixed price—just like the general contractors do.
You would therefore have to doubt that such a thing exists: an architect offering a fixed-price contract. But that is precisely the topic here. – I do believe such arrangements exist. However, the client then does not have the architect acting as their advocate, because the architect is closely connected with their contractors. The architect is also the general contractor. That’s how it is. I mentioned this further up. K.
Similar topics