ᐅ Planning Phase: Building Permit / Planning Permission and Financing – Procedure
Created on: 20 Nov 2021 13:42
L
liwandreas
Hi friends,
I have already spent several hours here on the forum since we are now the "proud owners" of a plot with an old house and are starting this project. We are still at the very beginning and have never done anything like this before – so I would like to learn from your experiences and first understand my options, especially regarding support during construction.
Situation
- Large plot, hillside location, Stuttgart area
- House from 1960, in poor condition (when buying, we expected a demolition, but the floor plan is okay and could be worked with).
- Three architects visited the site. All said, “a complete renovation is possible, but the recommendation is demolition if you are willing to invest more money.”
- We had discussions with prefabricated house suppliers – their cost estimates were higher or similar to the architects’ rough initial estimates. Plus, construction time is longer due to delivery times compared to new builds.
- We now have appointments with two architects to understand their ideas and concepts for the plot…
- Very rough initial cost estimates for construction are around 600,000 euros (approx. 660,000 USD) for about 200m2 (2,150 sq ft) living space… just a first indication.
Planning (Getting building permit / planning permission and financing)
We understand that we now need a house plan to submit for the building permit / planning permission, finalize financing, etc. The next step is to decide on an architect or general contractor.
Construction phase:
What basic options are there here, or what would you recommend, for example:
1) No support: I take the architect’s plans and start to tender and assign individual trades, coordinating everything myself
2) Minimal support: I assign trades; if I get stuck, I ask the architect. But I hire an independent expert (e.g. a building inspector from Dekra) to oversee the construction and approve the work (I have read a lot here about costs ranging from 3,000 to 10,000 euros (approx. 3,300 to 11,000 USD))
3) Maximum support: I pay the architect about 10% of the project cost and “they take care of everything”
Are these roughly the options I have? I haven’t quite understood the added value of paying an architect so much for supervision when an expert could also do that.
What are your thoughts on this?
Thank you
I have already spent several hours here on the forum since we are now the "proud owners" of a plot with an old house and are starting this project. We are still at the very beginning and have never done anything like this before – so I would like to learn from your experiences and first understand my options, especially regarding support during construction.
Situation
- Large plot, hillside location, Stuttgart area
- House from 1960, in poor condition (when buying, we expected a demolition, but the floor plan is okay and could be worked with).
- Three architects visited the site. All said, “a complete renovation is possible, but the recommendation is demolition if you are willing to invest more money.”
- We had discussions with prefabricated house suppliers – their cost estimates were higher or similar to the architects’ rough initial estimates. Plus, construction time is longer due to delivery times compared to new builds.
- We now have appointments with two architects to understand their ideas and concepts for the plot…
- Very rough initial cost estimates for construction are around 600,000 euros (approx. 660,000 USD) for about 200m2 (2,150 sq ft) living space… just a first indication.
Planning (Getting building permit / planning permission and financing)
We understand that we now need a house plan to submit for the building permit / planning permission, finalize financing, etc. The next step is to decide on an architect or general contractor.
Construction phase:
What basic options are there here, or what would you recommend, for example:
1) No support: I take the architect’s plans and start to tender and assign individual trades, coordinating everything myself
2) Minimal support: I assign trades; if I get stuck, I ask the architect. But I hire an independent expert (e.g. a building inspector from Dekra) to oversee the construction and approve the work (I have read a lot here about costs ranging from 3,000 to 10,000 euros (approx. 3,300 to 11,000 USD))
3) Maximum support: I pay the architect about 10% of the project cost and “they take care of everything”
Are these roughly the options I have? I haven’t quite understood the added value of paying an architect so much for supervision when an expert could also do that.
What are your thoughts on this?
Thank you
B
BauHerrHH22 Dec 2021 06:04Hello 11ant,
where can I find your house construction schedule with your phase model?
I only found references to it using the search function, but not the actual guide.
Kind regards
where can I find your house construction schedule with your phase model?
I only found references to it using the search function, but not the actual guide.
Kind regards
BauHerrHH schrieb:
I only found references to it using the search function, but not the actual guide itself. It is publicly available online—except for the last two parts, which will be released early next year ;-)
heamer1 schrieb:
Enter the following into your preferred search engine:
“A construction roadmap for your home: the HOAI phase model” ... since yesterday, it is even open for comments 🙂
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
L
liwandreas24 Dec 2021 02:11Hello everyone,
Here’s an update from us.
After some discussions and research (thanks also for the tip about the schedule), we have made some progress. We found a competent architect and are ready to start. We have two questions for the experts:
1) Termination:
Instead of commissioning only the initial phases (Module A), the architect sent us a contract allowing termination after each phase. I don’t see any problem with this. What do you think?
2) Scope:
I understand that the fee is calculated proportionally based on the net construction cost (we are in Zone III, three quarters). However, I have a question: if I want to handle certain trades myself (e.g., interior finishing or parts of it like tiling) either as self-performed work or by buying and having the tiles installed without the architect, the total construction cost doesn’t decrease, but the “construction cost under the architect’s responsibility” (that’s how I would put it, I think you get what I mean) does.
How is this usually handled?
I have already read that self-performed work does not reduce the architect’s fee, and I also understand that for the initial planning phases it does not matter who ultimately carries out the work. Still, it seems strange to pay the architect proportionally for, say, purchasing and installing tiles if the architect will not be involved in that at all.
In that case, you would have to take the full construction cost for the first planning phases and then a different, reduced construction cost for the subsequent phases… sounds complicated…
What do you say? How is this handled in practice?
Here’s an update from us.
After some discussions and research (thanks also for the tip about the schedule), we have made some progress. We found a competent architect and are ready to start. We have two questions for the experts:
1) Termination:
Instead of commissioning only the initial phases (Module A), the architect sent us a contract allowing termination after each phase. I don’t see any problem with this. What do you think?
2) Scope:
I understand that the fee is calculated proportionally based on the net construction cost (we are in Zone III, three quarters). However, I have a question: if I want to handle certain trades myself (e.g., interior finishing or parts of it like tiling) either as self-performed work or by buying and having the tiles installed without the architect, the total construction cost doesn’t decrease, but the “construction cost under the architect’s responsibility” (that’s how I would put it, I think you get what I mean) does.
How is this usually handled?
I have already read that self-performed work does not reduce the architect’s fee, and I also understand that for the initial planning phases it does not matter who ultimately carries out the work. Still, it seems strange to pay the architect proportionally for, say, purchasing and installing tiles if the architect will not be involved in that at all.
In that case, you would have to take the full construction cost for the first planning phases and then a different, reduced construction cost for the subsequent phases… sounds complicated…
What do you say? How is this handled in practice?
I advise against not having key trades supervised by the architect, as you will then have to coordinate interface issues yourself. Personally, I find Zone 3 three-quarter quite demanding for a single-family house, but maybe that is common practice where you are? For standard requirements, Zone 3 mid should be sufficient.
liwandreas schrieb:
Instead of commissioning only the initial phases (Module A), the architect sent us a contract with the right to terminate after each phase. I don’t see a problem here. What do you think? Whether this makes a difference depends on the consequences of termination – that is, whether you have to negotiate compensation for their lost profit from phases no longer performed, or if the contract ends without compensation. The grouping into modules was made for a good reason – namely, that termination points other than after completing phases 2 or 5 do not make much sense: between phases 2 and 3 it makes sense to have a “cooling-off” period, which is a common and classic moment to assess whether the “chemistry” between parties is promising; the building permit / planning permission is a “certificate” that alone would be foolish to treat as if it were a plan—beyond precise dimensional sketches, its visual attachments are not much more. Having the detailed planning (service phase 5) carried out by someone not involved from the start, a “godparent” unrelated to the initial work, is at least inefficient – so my recommendation is to have the same planner who completed service phases 1 to 4 also take care of phase 5. The phase that involves the architect (and potentially the general contractor) in Module C proceeds differently with the general contractor alone (without the architect). My module model is not a universally valid truth but a way to help the (typically layperson) “homebuilder” understand professional planning processes, based on my roughly forty years of relevant experience. The HOAI phase model itself is well-established, originating from relating work to payment, and normally assumes the architect is commissioned for the entire scope from service phase 1 to 9 (or, classically for private homes, phases 1 to 8), and it also does not usually account for the occasional wish to change architects.
liwandreas schrieb:
If I want to handle certain trades myself (e.g., interior finishing or parts like tiling) [...] the total construction cost doesn’t decrease, but the “construction cost under the architect’s responsibility” does. A house is an “individual”; it has only one set of requirements for the planner. The projected total costs are nothing more or less than an auxiliary measure for calculating fees. In this sense, contractor work and self-performed work are equivalent, and awarding contracts to a professional or doing it yourself makes just a cash-flow difference. The architect performs the same job regardless of whether “Joe” or “Bob” is handling the trowel.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Similar topics