ᐅ Process for Architect and Floor Plan: Phases 1–4

chr2010 schrieb:

You should also include a date for the planned submission of the application in the contract. Have you clearly communicated your wish to submit it in March?

For us, the process went somewhat faster than expected, but we also spoke with our architect at least once a week. From the initial drafts to submission, it still took almost 4 months, as several iterations are needed.

Now, during the detailed planning and tendering phase, we speak 2-3 times per week. Emails come in addition to that.

We did not document our "desired deadline" in writing. Unfortunately, that seems like a mistake now. We communicated our timeline to him via email over a certain period. Since we have to move out of our house because the new house will be built on that property, we are moving into an apartment starting in May (for various reasons, this cannot be changed or postponed) — so we wanted to submit the application by March or April. This would allow us to begin demolition as well.

Speaking with the architect at least once a week sounds great. Is your architect proactive, or do you find that you have to reach out to them more often? Thanks and best regards 🙂

Kapitänin schrieb:

We have met twice and discussed changes. That went quite well each time. But now, for example, we have been waiting for a reply for two weeks. I’m getting a bit restless. There isn’t a CAD drawing yet, only the floor plan in 2D so far.

Is the floor plan only available on paper?
Our engineer uses a specialized architectural CAD program where the floor plan is drawn in 2D but can also be displayed in 3D. However, the 3D aspect is not the main point. The key advantage of having a floor plan in software is that changes can be made live, making, for example, room area calculations easy to update. Also, sending the floor plan along with sections, etc., to the client shouldn’t take more than five minutes.

Kapitänin schrieb:

Talking on the phone at least once a week sounds great. Is your architect actively involved, or do you find yourselves reaching out to them more? Thanks and best regards 🙂

It really depends. Sometimes we contact them with questions, sometimes they reach out to us. I always discuss the overall status, next steps, and whether they need anything from us. I once considered setting up a weekly fixed meeting, but so many things come up spontaneously that it doesn’t seem worthwhile.

I had already suspected that the description was only symbolic in content and that, in reality, there was a lot of talking past each other with many more words. But it was apparently talking past each other – and among other things, it was not made clear enough who the client is and who pays the bills. The house is not designed to please the architect but the homeowner. Therefore, their professional advice should be mentioned, but nothing more, and a vestibule (or entrance hall) should be planned if the homeowners wish so. Architect CAD software typically works in 3D, but only internally; the drawings (except for isometric views, which are hardly used in planning for permits or execution) are usually generated in 2D from it. 3D in client meetings is not really part of the planning (at least when we are talking about a single-family home and not a museum building), but more for client presentation. And here lies the problem when homeowners expect the same approach from an architect as from the draftsman of the general contractor, with endless rounds of multiple revisions of floor plans and so on: then the house is planned on two tracks, meaning once in an architect CAD system for the technical planning process and a clone in a parallel software environment focused on “visualization at the layperson’s eye level.” As a result, transcribing every change from the professional planning program into the layperson discussion program inevitably costs unnecessary time. Anyone who wants to speed up the architect’s work should therefore limit change rounds to a maximum of two instead of endless back and forth, sidesteps, and delays. But: first, one must firmly make clear when the architect wants to build HIS house instead of THE CLIENT’S!

Furthermore, the "misuse" of the digital tools available today in planning leads to printing out every change discussion status, which causes the risk of having many confusing versions in circulation afterward; as a result, the utility installer from the power company might install their box in the wrong place because that was the right place in an earlier version of the plan. This “planning” via messenger ping-pong leads to nothing but two problems: the increase of a new category of complications, “defects due to planning,” and drawn-out planning processes like chewing gum.

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

Communication with the architect is based on necessity and can be planned. When will there be a new update? What needs to be discussed by when? By when do decisions have to be made? You already have a time frame. Work backward from the move-in date together, and a schedule will emerge that can be detailed.

We had decided to take plenty of time and enjoy the planning and construction phases. My wife and I went through phases of patience and impatience that were barely understandable to the architect. Sometimes I awaited a response with the excitement of a child anticipating birthday presents – this creates demands on the architect that are hard to meet. We talked and laughed about this. Although we took our time, we had a plan that required several adjustments but ultimately provided an excellent foundation for communication. It also helped manage our expectations.

Kapitänin schrieb:

Darauf nur seine Antwort, dass man heutzutage keinen Windfang mehr baut...

I find that highly alarming – I hope he had more to say than just that. It doesn’t matter what “people” do nowadays; what counts is what the client wants to achieve. A good architect helps creatively and consultatively here. Whether an enclosed entryway (vestibule/mudroom) is built or not – the client’s goals come first.

11ant schrieb:

Im übrigen führt der "Mißbrauch" der Digitalität des heutigen Planens zum Ausdrucken jedes Änderungsdiskussionszwischenstandes ursächlich zu der Gefahr, nachher unübersichtlich viele Versionsstände im Umlauf zu haben

This should be pinned at the very top.

Kapitänin schrieb:

It’s not the change itself. We like the floor plan.

That makes me happy.

I’d prefer not to share the floor plan for now. My husband is against it ;-)

That’s a pity, but I can understand.

Thank you. Wishing you lots of success. I’m keeping my fingers crossed that the collaboration improves.

Don’t forget: the client calls the shots. 😉