Hello everyone,
we are at the very beginning of our building project and are currently complete beginners.
We are about to purchase our building plot near Wolfsburg, Lower Saxony. We expect to start construction on our fully serviced plot in the middle of next year.
Although there is still plenty of time ahead, we want to start planning now. Often, turnkey homes at fixed prices are offered by various companies. However, many friends and colleagues recently advised me to carry out the planning (and ultimately the approvals) with an architect and to contract the trades individually during construction. The cost savings could be at least €50,000.
I am quite flexible with my time at work and would be interested in diving deeper into the topic and investing a lot of my own time and energy. Since I work as an IT project manager, I am not very skilled with practical tasks. However, I feel confident managing the project itself.
Ultimately, I would approach this financially quite pragmatically: if by investing my own effort in the build I can save more money than I earn net in the same time, I would prefer to focus less on my job and spend more time on the build. With a potential saving of over €50,000, this would very likely be the case.
However, I do wonder if this approach really makes sense for me. My biggest concerns are in hiring tradespeople. There is often talk of a shortage of skilled workers, and if as a private home builder I end up waiting, for example, 1.5 years to get a roofer, I certainly wouldn’t have gained anything.
I would greatly appreciate your assessments!
we are at the very beginning of our building project and are currently complete beginners.
We are about to purchase our building plot near Wolfsburg, Lower Saxony. We expect to start construction on our fully serviced plot in the middle of next year.
Although there is still plenty of time ahead, we want to start planning now. Often, turnkey homes at fixed prices are offered by various companies. However, many friends and colleagues recently advised me to carry out the planning (and ultimately the approvals) with an architect and to contract the trades individually during construction. The cost savings could be at least €50,000.
I am quite flexible with my time at work and would be interested in diving deeper into the topic and investing a lot of my own time and energy. Since I work as an IT project manager, I am not very skilled with practical tasks. However, I feel confident managing the project itself.
Ultimately, I would approach this financially quite pragmatically: if by investing my own effort in the build I can save more money than I earn net in the same time, I would prefer to focus less on my job and spend more time on the build. With a potential saving of over €50,000, this would very likely be the case.
However, I do wonder if this approach really makes sense for me. My biggest concerns are in hiring tradespeople. There is often talk of a shortage of skilled workers, and if as a private home builder I end up waiting, for example, 1.5 years to get a roofer, I certainly wouldn’t have gained anything.
I would greatly appreciate your assessments!
M
Myrna_Loy9 Mar 2022 10:28I work in property management and am also responsible for bidding and awarding contracts in the area of renovation and remodeling. I would never recommend a layperson take on this area. Even we still make mistakes, for example with the interfaces between trades. If I were RICH!, I would have all phases of work planned and executed by a carefully chosen architect. For new construction, I would rather work with a general contractor and trust that issues can be managed through the builder’s risk insurance.
Half-baked solutions—like having some architectural involvement and handling the rest through self-contracting—always go wrong, as defects inevitably lead to disputes over responsibility in the planning and coordination of trades and designers. In times of material shortages and rising costs, it becomes even more difficult to keep track of everything. When then there is debate over whether a replacement building component is “identical” or “equivalent,” that’s when the real trouble begins.
Half-baked solutions—like having some architectural involvement and handling the rest through self-contracting—always go wrong, as defects inevitably lead to disputes over responsibility in the planning and coordination of trades and designers. In times of material shortages and rising costs, it becomes even more difficult to keep track of everything. When then there is debate over whether a replacement building component is “identical” or “equivalent,” that’s when the real trouble begins.
W
WilderSueden9 Mar 2022 10:44SvenF86 schrieb:
3-4 hours of preliminary talks felt more like a sales pitch than a genuine project initiation... You are approaching this with the wrong expectation. When you go to a car dealer, you don’t expect independent advice (“instead of the Mercedes, take the Skoda at half the price”), but a sales conversation. Similarly, others sell houses. In small companies, the owner usually handles the sales talk themselves, while larger companies have professional salespeople. Basically, you shouldn’t expect independent advice there—you need to educate yourself and learn how to read a building specification. Alternatively, you can hire an architect who provides independent consulting for a fee. Both options are valid.
The recommendation to use the technology typically preferred by the general contractor (GC) applies not only to the building materials but also to the building services. The GC’s standard equipment should ideally align as closely as possible with your preferences. Although you can customize everything, a GC that is initially cheaper but requires many upgrades usually ends up more expensive than a GC with a higher standard.
SvenF86 schrieb:
Okay, I was mostly trying to get a sense of where I would end up price-wise, compared to a standard production house (e.g., Viebrockhaus, Town & Country, etc.).
You should let go of the idea that anyone will build your dream home significantly cheaper than someone else. The price depends less on the builder and much more on you. If you want to compare offers, you should list your desired features and specifications in detail.
When we did that back then, all the relevant offers were within a range of +/- 10,000.
Some get excluded because they might not offer your desired quality level. Others may be far above your budget.
We then chose one of the most expensive options in our segment – purely based on gut feeling and sympathy.
Standard production homes can actually be cheaper. But then everything really has to fit exactly. It’s not just about walls, the number of rooms, windows, and selections. It’s also important, for example, whether and how easily your plot can actually be built on. Can you really put a standard house there quickly and easily, or are site preparations or development works necessary? The more complicated it is, the less suitable standard homes become. In the end, “simple” can be done by anyone – what really counts is the quality of the finishes.
Y
Ypsi aus NI9 Mar 2022 11:28Hello neighbor, would you mind sharing exactly where near WOB you are building?
We also live quite close by and have our topping-out ceremony tomorrow :-)
We also approached the companies with a self-designed floor plan.
Except for Viebrockhaus, all the prices were on a similar level. The company we chose was a bit more expensive than the others, but they offered a much more comprehensive scope of work. This company combines carpentry and masonry under one roof, so fewer subcontractors who want to earn on the project.
It’s a local family business. I always said: The manager has a certain local pride. If she goes to the sports field on a Sunday afternoon, she doesn’t want to be pelted with rotten eggs ;-) So, the company stands for solid craftsmanship.
We tried hiring the heating and plumbing trades ourselves. At first, our requests were offered at lower prices than through the general contractor. But they also offered less in terms of scope, which we didn’t notice as laymen. Our general contractor reviewed the offers and pointed this out. So, we ended up using their subcontractor, also a local company with decades of experience, known for top quality but also a high price. In the end, we didn’t pay more than if we had hired the equivalent scope ourselves. There are already discounts between the general contractor and their subs.
By chance, we spoke to several unrelated people who work professionally in construction. They all told us that with this company we don’t need external construction supervision. For most of the other local companies, they recommended it. And to avoid any misunderstanding: we were told this before we mentioned which company we are building with.
Of course, not everything is perfect, but so far we are very satisfied with the general contractor. Also, the coordination, for example with the plumbing specialist, the discussion about where the water pipes run, integrating this into the drawings, etc. Doing and coordinating all that yourself? No thanks.
We are building with air conditioning, which was also contracted externally. But our general contractor still coordinates everything directly with them and integrates the ducts into the drawings, etc.
I’m drifting off... ;-) To sum it up: In this area, everyone makes you an offer based on an individual floor plan. An architect doesn’t really have an interest in keeping your building costs low because they get paid a percentage. Near the “Mama City” VW, it’s hard to find tradespeople. The general contractors simply have their subs on hand.
So, one more vote in favor of a general contractor and against an architect!
We also live quite close by and have our topping-out ceremony tomorrow :-)
We also approached the companies with a self-designed floor plan.
Except for Viebrockhaus, all the prices were on a similar level. The company we chose was a bit more expensive than the others, but they offered a much more comprehensive scope of work. This company combines carpentry and masonry under one roof, so fewer subcontractors who want to earn on the project.
It’s a local family business. I always said: The manager has a certain local pride. If she goes to the sports field on a Sunday afternoon, she doesn’t want to be pelted with rotten eggs ;-) So, the company stands for solid craftsmanship.
We tried hiring the heating and plumbing trades ourselves. At first, our requests were offered at lower prices than through the general contractor. But they also offered less in terms of scope, which we didn’t notice as laymen. Our general contractor reviewed the offers and pointed this out. So, we ended up using their subcontractor, also a local company with decades of experience, known for top quality but also a high price. In the end, we didn’t pay more than if we had hired the equivalent scope ourselves. There are already discounts between the general contractor and their subs.
By chance, we spoke to several unrelated people who work professionally in construction. They all told us that with this company we don’t need external construction supervision. For most of the other local companies, they recommended it. And to avoid any misunderstanding: we were told this before we mentioned which company we are building with.
Of course, not everything is perfect, but so far we are very satisfied with the general contractor. Also, the coordination, for example with the plumbing specialist, the discussion about where the water pipes run, integrating this into the drawings, etc. Doing and coordinating all that yourself? No thanks.
We are building with air conditioning, which was also contracted externally. But our general contractor still coordinates everything directly with them and integrates the ducts into the drawings, etc.
I’m drifting off... ;-) To sum it up: In this area, everyone makes you an offer based on an individual floor plan. An architect doesn’t really have an interest in keeping your building costs low because they get paid a percentage. Near the “Mama City” VW, it’s hard to find tradespeople. The general contractors simply have their subs on hand.
So, one more vote in favor of a general contractor and against an architect!
B
Benutzer2009 Mar 2022 11:50@ TE: If you really want to build cheaply, you should actually take care of everything yourself (except for the planning and a detailed scope of work for each trade) and consider both materials and craftsmen from abroad.
There are excellent companies and well-trained craftsmen in Eastern and Southeastern Europe, and the same materials are used as in Germany.
BUT: Learn, for example, Polish (and pray that you don’t often hear the word "kurva" from the craftsmen), forgo warranties, and be on site daily with the construction plans (bringing coffee in the morning helps to start the day, then spend a few hours in the afternoon checking things, as far as your schedule allows).
Also, there are craftsmen who ask you to waive a formal invoice. I don’t understand why, but it apparently happens.
In addition, doing some of the work yourself is the last option to significantly reduce costs. However, this is not without challenges, since a) friends or acquaintances have to help (do they always have the time and motivation?), b) you need to be skilled yourself, and c) the construction usually takes considerably longer (the double burden of rent can reduce the cost-saving advantage).
These are the ways to get very inexpensive construction done.
P.S. I know all these options from my own building projects (I come from the real estate sector). I wouldn’t recommend this to any layperson.
There are excellent companies and well-trained craftsmen in Eastern and Southeastern Europe, and the same materials are used as in Germany.
BUT: Learn, for example, Polish (and pray that you don’t often hear the word "kurva" from the craftsmen), forgo warranties, and be on site daily with the construction plans (bringing coffee in the morning helps to start the day, then spend a few hours in the afternoon checking things, as far as your schedule allows).
Also, there are craftsmen who ask you to waive a formal invoice. I don’t understand why, but it apparently happens.
In addition, doing some of the work yourself is the last option to significantly reduce costs. However, this is not without challenges, since a) friends or acquaintances have to help (do they always have the time and motivation?), b) you need to be skilled yourself, and c) the construction usually takes considerably longer (the double burden of rent can reduce the cost-saving advantage).
These are the ways to get very inexpensive construction done.
P.S. I know all these options from my own building projects (I come from the real estate sector). I wouldn’t recommend this to any layperson.
First of all, you should familiarize yourself with the questionnaire (pinned at the top of the floor plan section). If your ideal situation fits "two adults sharing a bedroom, a total of two children and a home office, a ground-level plot without special restrictions in the zoning plan," then there is initially no reason to reject a catalog design. The catalog design (also called a standard house, Gabrieles Lieblingsheinz calls it “system architecture”) and the construction company that offers it are naturally linked: for example, a catalog design from Meierbau built by Müllerbau would still be considered a custom design. A catalog design is only suitable if you a) use it as is or with the relocation of a few non-load-bearing walls, or b) extend it linearly along the ridge axis. Extensions that affect the base of the gable triangle structurally create a different house (a linear increase by changing the knee wall height has less impact — less than changes to the floor-to-ceiling height). A catalog house is an inseparable combination of the house design AND the construction and service specification of the respective general contractor (GC)!
You should ALWAYS approach a custom design with an independent architect (in the sense of the perfect Bavarian negation “never ever no exception not”!). A house designed by an architect becomes more expensive if you a) want it not only individually tailored but also as a unique design piece, and/or b) engage an artist. The latter can usually be recognized fairly reliably by the fact that they only offer design phases 1 to 4: they are not good at cost estimation or construction management — their designs are therefore not suitable for affordable and low-complication realization.
Secondly, you must “religiously” commit to one path: whether you prefer to be guided by the result of a tender process, or whether you want to follow beliefs passed down by yourself or friends (e.g., awarding the shell package as a whole, then contracting all trades individually). When dealing with tenders and contracts, keep in mind that the leverage is roughly 2:1, meaning an unexperienced person is likely to experience about twice as much cost overrun bad luck as savings luck on this route (you must add this up yourself now).
Change orders are items you forgot to include in your request for proposal. The contractor balances out price increases here and also most effectively takes revenge for any price pressure;
Additions are items that are added later — also keep in mind that your own quantity and measurement calculations are worthless if you made a miscalculation;
Time-and-material work refers to extra work billed by the hour, where a contractor first has to establish the conformity between plans and reality of a prior trade before starting their own work (for example, chipping or skim coating mistakes made by the predecessor).
Regarding the scope of architect commissioning, I recommend searching (with the phrase in quotes) for “A house construction roadmap, also for you: the HOAI phase model!” which I’m unfortunately not allowed to link here. The popular commissioning of phases 1 to 4 is not recommended regardless of your overall strategy, nor is your idea of phases 1 to 3: if you go to a GC (to plan individually but with their draftsman), then phase 3 is already wasted money, because the draftsman can base his approval planning just as well on preliminary designs from phase 2 (his usual raw material is the “SweetHome tinkering” the homeowner’s spouse proudly created on the computer). The draftsman’s “working drawings” are not remotely comparable to architectural detailed planning of phase 5, but barely more than formwork drawings — in a draftsman’s plan, drywall bumps are as certain as the amen in church!
The ideal approach according to my recommendation is to entrust the design, detailed planning, tendering, and construction supervision all to the same planner. The “resting time” between Module A and Module B is also important here, even if you are (as should normally be the case) already certain after Module A to continue with the same planner. In “Of site managers and… site managers” you will find explanations about the differences in objectives between your architect site manager and/or construction consultant and the GC-appointed site manager who only nominally has the same title. Therefore, never give up your “lawyer with a measuring tape.”
You don’t have to run away if your chosen contractor turns out to be a franchise partner of a big name, but you should avoid deliberately approaching big names. Their strength lies in marketing and legal departments; construction competence lies at the workface with the mason’s trowel. The same applies to tendering: have a professional create separate lots for the trades and do not exclude GCs, but limiting yourself exclusively to GCs as contractors makes no sense. Discuss with your planner whether you want to conduct the tender in two parts (shell / interior fit-out). I see no objection to your own proposed participants being included in the bidding.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
You should ALWAYS approach a custom design with an independent architect (in the sense of the perfect Bavarian negation “never ever no exception not”!). A house designed by an architect becomes more expensive if you a) want it not only individually tailored but also as a unique design piece, and/or b) engage an artist. The latter can usually be recognized fairly reliably by the fact that they only offer design phases 1 to 4: they are not good at cost estimation or construction management — their designs are therefore not suitable for affordable and low-complication realization.
Secondly, you must “religiously” commit to one path: whether you prefer to be guided by the result of a tender process, or whether you want to follow beliefs passed down by yourself or friends (e.g., awarding the shell package as a whole, then contracting all trades individually). When dealing with tenders and contracts, keep in mind that the leverage is roughly 2:1, meaning an unexperienced person is likely to experience about twice as much cost overrun bad luck as savings luck on this route (you must add this up yourself now).
Change orders are items you forgot to include in your request for proposal. The contractor balances out price increases here and also most effectively takes revenge for any price pressure;
Additions are items that are added later — also keep in mind that your own quantity and measurement calculations are worthless if you made a miscalculation;
Time-and-material work refers to extra work billed by the hour, where a contractor first has to establish the conformity between plans and reality of a prior trade before starting their own work (for example, chipping or skim coating mistakes made by the predecessor).
Regarding the scope of architect commissioning, I recommend searching (with the phrase in quotes) for “A house construction roadmap, also for you: the HOAI phase model!” which I’m unfortunately not allowed to link here. The popular commissioning of phases 1 to 4 is not recommended regardless of your overall strategy, nor is your idea of phases 1 to 3: if you go to a GC (to plan individually but with their draftsman), then phase 3 is already wasted money, because the draftsman can base his approval planning just as well on preliminary designs from phase 2 (his usual raw material is the “SweetHome tinkering” the homeowner’s spouse proudly created on the computer). The draftsman’s “working drawings” are not remotely comparable to architectural detailed planning of phase 5, but barely more than formwork drawings — in a draftsman’s plan, drywall bumps are as certain as the amen in church!
The ideal approach according to my recommendation is to entrust the design, detailed planning, tendering, and construction supervision all to the same planner. The “resting time” between Module A and Module B is also important here, even if you are (as should normally be the case) already certain after Module A to continue with the same planner. In “Of site managers and… site managers” you will find explanations about the differences in objectives between your architect site manager and/or construction consultant and the GC-appointed site manager who only nominally has the same title. Therefore, never give up your “lawyer with a measuring tape.”
You don’t have to run away if your chosen contractor turns out to be a franchise partner of a big name, but you should avoid deliberately approaching big names. Their strength lies in marketing and legal departments; construction competence lies at the workface with the mason’s trowel. The same applies to tendering: have a professional create separate lots for the trades and do not exclude GCs, but limiting yourself exclusively to GCs as contractors makes no sense. Discuss with your planner whether you want to conduct the tender in two parts (shell / interior fit-out). I see no objection to your own proposed participants being included in the bidding.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Similar topics