ᐅ Affordable Building Without Compromising Quality, Architect-Designed Home
Created on: 2 Jan 2024 12:33
I
IIIIIIIIIIIIII
Hello everyone!
I have been quietly following this forum for some time, and our house-building project (single-family home) will probably start in Q1/Q2.
I am wondering how to build a house in 2024 cost-effectively without compromising quality.
We have a budget of about 500,000-600,000 euros for the entire construction (excluding the land).
That is a lot of money, but not unlimited – I want to get the best out of it.
A brief overview of our project:
~120m2 (two floors), steep slope, no basement (not possible), 2 adults (maybe one child max in the future), undeveloped plot.
I assume that land development, slope work, and foundation slab will cost around 100,000 euros.
That leaves around 400,000 euros for a move-in ready house.
We have already looked at prefab house providers, but none of their offers matched what we wanted – customizing prefab houses is about as expensive as working directly with an architect.
The plan is to have the house built "ready for finishing" (shell and core) and carry out most of the interior work ourselves (walls, floors, tiles, bathrooms—only the tiling!—and outdoor terraces). We have sufficient craftsmanship skills for this!
Where is the best place to save costs?
What features are often installed without real benefit? (e.g., laundry chute, central vacuum system, automatic blinds, etc.)
Where should you definitely not save?
Should an independent expert inspect the work? Or is that a waste of money for a general contractor/architect-led build?
Should the construction contract be reviewed by a lawyer?
My current thoughts are:
* Simple building shape (rectangle), straightforward pitched roof construction
* No unnecessary home technology (ventilation system, smart home, etc.)
* Minimize large window areas
* Only a carport, no double garage
* The building method (timber frame, solid wood construction like Holz100, masonry) is still open – I prefer timber frame/solid wood.
* Good planning once is cheaper than planning two or three times
* Double checking is cheaper than fixing poorly done work afterwards
* A wood stove is nice, but a fireplace is also expensive.
Where else can you save? What unnecessarily drives construction costs up?
Our idea is:
If we skip things like a double garage, we have more budget for high-quality interior finishes.
We prefer to invest in interior finishing rather than, for example, a laundry chute, central vacuum system, automatic blinds, and so on.
I understand that features like a laundry chute can be subjective when it comes to being "unnecessary" or not.
The goal is to figure out what is essential for a house build, where one should definitely not save, and which elements can be omitted.
There are also significant price ranges for stairs, windows, doors, facades, and roof coverings.
Does it have to be an expensive branded roof? Will a cheaper option suffice?
With this "pre-planning," I also want to minimize the cost of architectural planning. If we come to the architect with a realistic, well-thought-out plan, it probably saves a few thousand euros... Also, an independent building surveyor can save money by detecting issues early on – once the progress payment is made, it is hard to get the money back.
Thanks in advance for your tips and opinions.
I have been quietly following this forum for some time, and our house-building project (single-family home) will probably start in Q1/Q2.
I am wondering how to build a house in 2024 cost-effectively without compromising quality.
We have a budget of about 500,000-600,000 euros for the entire construction (excluding the land).
That is a lot of money, but not unlimited – I want to get the best out of it.
A brief overview of our project:
~120m2 (two floors), steep slope, no basement (not possible), 2 adults (maybe one child max in the future), undeveloped plot.
I assume that land development, slope work, and foundation slab will cost around 100,000 euros.
That leaves around 400,000 euros for a move-in ready house.
We have already looked at prefab house providers, but none of their offers matched what we wanted – customizing prefab houses is about as expensive as working directly with an architect.
The plan is to have the house built "ready for finishing" (shell and core) and carry out most of the interior work ourselves (walls, floors, tiles, bathrooms—only the tiling!—and outdoor terraces). We have sufficient craftsmanship skills for this!
Where is the best place to save costs?
What features are often installed without real benefit? (e.g., laundry chute, central vacuum system, automatic blinds, etc.)
Where should you definitely not save?
Should an independent expert inspect the work? Or is that a waste of money for a general contractor/architect-led build?
Should the construction contract be reviewed by a lawyer?
My current thoughts are:
* Simple building shape (rectangle), straightforward pitched roof construction
* No unnecessary home technology (ventilation system, smart home, etc.)
* Minimize large window areas
* Only a carport, no double garage
* The building method (timber frame, solid wood construction like Holz100, masonry) is still open – I prefer timber frame/solid wood.
* Good planning once is cheaper than planning two or three times
* Double checking is cheaper than fixing poorly done work afterwards
* A wood stove is nice, but a fireplace is also expensive.
Where else can you save? What unnecessarily drives construction costs up?
Our idea is:
If we skip things like a double garage, we have more budget for high-quality interior finishes.
We prefer to invest in interior finishing rather than, for example, a laundry chute, central vacuum system, automatic blinds, and so on.
I understand that features like a laundry chute can be subjective when it comes to being "unnecessary" or not.
The goal is to figure out what is essential for a house build, where one should definitely not save, and which elements can be omitted.
There are also significant price ranges for stairs, windows, doors, facades, and roof coverings.
Does it have to be an expensive branded roof? Will a cheaper option suffice?
With this "pre-planning," I also want to minimize the cost of architectural planning. If we come to the architect with a realistic, well-thought-out plan, it probably saves a few thousand euros... Also, an independent building surveyor can save money by detecting issues early on – once the progress payment is made, it is hard to get the money back.
Thanks in advance for your tips and opinions.
Are the 400,000 excluding VAT and additional construction costs?
You can’t save anything here; at 350€ per meter (3.3 feet), I don’t think of such affordable rural areas.
Are there similar projects nearby that could give you a reference for building on a slope?
In our case, besides VAT, there were at least 20% additional construction costs and tens of thousands of euros in unforeseen expenses to cover.
I would actually consider whether 400,000€ is set very low nowadays for a location that is profitable, even if experience is available.
You can’t save anything here; at 350€ per meter (3.3 feet), I don’t think of such affordable rural areas.
Are there similar projects nearby that could give you a reference for building on a slope?
In our case, besides VAT, there were at least 20% additional construction costs and tens of thousands of euros in unforeseen expenses to cover.
I would actually consider whether 400,000€ is set very low nowadays for a location that is profitable, even if experience is available.
H
HilfeHilfe3 Jan 2024 05:40Cost-Effective Building Without Quality Loss, Architect-Designed House
Sorry, but there are two contradictions in that.
Sorry, but there are two contradictions in that.
I
IIIIIIIIIIIIII3 Jan 2024 08:34[RARELY can one make generalizations like: Save this, skip that … take the pumping station you mentioned, which you say you don’t need. If there was a plan including contour lines and the access road, we could address whether it’s really unnecessary. As it stands, it’s a back-and-forth of questions that can ultimately annoy you and others. In the end, there are no constructive answers.
I would go further and say you need to know who will move in, their age, and how many people (children). This influences, for example, how much hallway space is needed or if any at all. The living areas, meaning the floor plan, can greatly influence costs. Or how large the hot water tank needs to be…]
The plan is not ready yet; it is still being created. Maybe I am jumping the gun here; much of what you want and want to know does not exist yet.
The residents will be me and my girlfriend, both 30 years old, currently without children, and we actually want to remain childless or at most (!) have one child.
[A layperson does not plan efficiently, often either wasting space with large rooms or designing something that works suboptimally. Therefore, it makes sense to leave this to a professional. They get paid anyway—whether they think for themselves or let the client decide—they put their name on it.]
I do not want to optimize the floor plan yet but rather to exclude or include things in advance that either make sense or not. The planned ~120m2 (about 1300 sq ft) is realistic (we visited several prefabricated houses ranging from 80 to 200m2, and 120/130m2 feels right).
[A two-story house creates a tower-like structure, barely providing efficient storage space. About 60m2 (650 sq ft) per floor invites frustration. Since neither the plot size nor the building envelope is known yet (see the topic on essentials), I still suggest a single-story house plus a converted pitched roof (for example, 26–30° roof pitch without knee walls): the attic can later, if a child arrives, be converted into children’s rooms, well-accessible storage, and hobby or office space. On the ground floor, parents, an open-plan area, and technical rooms. Around 85–90m2 (900–970 sq ft) is a good size, with 40–50m2 (430–540 sq ft) in the attic, expanded as needed.]
Okay, I probably expressed myself poorly; we want one ground floor and then an extended roof structure above it. 60m2 (650 sq ft) per floor is probably, as you said, suboptimal in terms of layout. Putting everything on one floor will likely make the earthwork much more expensive because more area must be formed.
Thanks very much for the other tips 🙂
I would go further and say you need to know who will move in, their age, and how many people (children). This influences, for example, how much hallway space is needed or if any at all. The living areas, meaning the floor plan, can greatly influence costs. Or how large the hot water tank needs to be…]
The plan is not ready yet; it is still being created. Maybe I am jumping the gun here; much of what you want and want to know does not exist yet.
The residents will be me and my girlfriend, both 30 years old, currently without children, and we actually want to remain childless or at most (!) have one child.
[A layperson does not plan efficiently, often either wasting space with large rooms or designing something that works suboptimally. Therefore, it makes sense to leave this to a professional. They get paid anyway—whether they think for themselves or let the client decide—they put their name on it.]
I do not want to optimize the floor plan yet but rather to exclude or include things in advance that either make sense or not. The planned ~120m2 (about 1300 sq ft) is realistic (we visited several prefabricated houses ranging from 80 to 200m2, and 120/130m2 feels right).
[A two-story house creates a tower-like structure, barely providing efficient storage space. About 60m2 (650 sq ft) per floor invites frustration. Since neither the plot size nor the building envelope is known yet (see the topic on essentials), I still suggest a single-story house plus a converted pitched roof (for example, 26–30° roof pitch without knee walls): the attic can later, if a child arrives, be converted into children’s rooms, well-accessible storage, and hobby or office space. On the ground floor, parents, an open-plan area, and technical rooms. Around 85–90m2 (900–970 sq ft) is a good size, with 40–50m2 (430–540 sq ft) in the attic, expanded as needed.]
Okay, I probably expressed myself poorly; we want one ground floor and then an extended roof structure above it. 60m2 (650 sq ft) per floor is probably, as you said, suboptimal in terms of layout. Putting everything on one floor will likely make the earthwork much more expensive because more area must be formed.
Thanks very much for the other tips 🙂
I
IIIIIIIIIIIIII3 Jan 2024 08:46Malunga schrieb:
Are the 400k excluding VAT and additional construction costs?
You can’t save anything there; at 350€ per meter I don’t think of such inexpensive rural areas.
Are there similar projects in the neighborhood that could give you a reference for “building on a slope”?
Besides VAT, we had at least 20% additional construction costs and tens of thousands of euros in “unforeseen” expenses.
I would actually be concerned whether 400k€ is set very cheaply nowadays for such a, albeit attractive, location—even if experience is available. It is an inexpensive rural area. Just in a spot where wealthy people like to have a second home. (We are not doing that; we want to live there, the family is from that village.)
The other projects completed there are all smaller residential complexes with apartments (4–12 units per building, mostly vacation apartments/investment properties).
400k for a house starting from the foundation should realistically be possible—a prefabricated house supplier told me when I inquired that the house we were just inside, including foundation (of course on flat land), would cost 400,000€ turnkey. 150m2 (1,615 sq ft).
I can’t imagine building a 120m2 (1,290 sq ft) house costing more than 600,000€, even on a slope.
An acquaintance is building a 300m2 (3,230 sq ft) villa for 800,000€ (including double garage, swimming pool, and landscaping...) on a slope.
HilfeHilfe schrieb:
Cost-effective Building Without Quality Loss, Architect-designed House
Sorry, but there are two contradictions there. If you read my post carefully, there aren’t.
There are definitely things you can omit or replace that you don’t need for a quality build.
Or, for example, is a house with a smart home electronics upgrade automatically a quality build?
Also, we don’t want to build as cheaply as possible, only to identify things that don’t add value for us and save costs there. Otherwise, we would indeed have a 120m2 (1,290 sq ft) prefabricated house built as cheaply as possible without extras. (But that costs not 400k but rather about 280k.)
X
xMisterDx3 Jan 2024 09:56dertill schrieb:
(...)
Also, we don’t want to build as cheaply as possible, just cutting costs on things that don’t add value for us. Otherwise, we would indeed commission the cheapest 120m² (1300 sq ft) prefabricated house without any extras. (That wouldn’t cost 400k but rather around 280k)Although I’m a big fan of “off-the-shelf” houses because you can actually get good quality at a reasonable price… the premiums for customization push the price up without a proportional increase in quality... this is a classic phenomenon in mass production: when customers want extras, costs quickly rise disproportionately, without the added value increasing at the same rate...
You have unfortunately not yet understood that this won’t work for you on your (very steep) slope. The prefab house supplier will build your house on a slab foundation. Period. In 99.5% of cases, they don’t have a standard house model that can be built into a slope with a livable basement or cellar. And you can’t have the standard house redesigned for a slope without extensive modifications.
Even the subcontractors that the prefab supplier works with have little experience with this because they mostly build houses on slabs, not basements built into slopes with waterproofing, light wells, and so on.
With your 400k budget, you are already at the low end for a fully custom-designed house, which is what you need given your individual situation on the slope. That’s just the reality. For comparison, the standard model Flair 125 from my favorite benchmark supplier Town & Country costs nearly 300k for the 120m² (1300 sq ft) version. Turnkey. And another 50,000 EUR can easily be added before it’s ready to move in.
What you envision won’t work with your budget. And even if it did, are you aware of what your steep slope means for the landscaping? Unless you’re extremely skilled with an excavator, expect to pay an additional 100,000 EUR to properly design and implement all of that.
X
xMisterDx3 Jan 2024 10:02How "dertill" ended up as the source there is beyond me. Sorry about that, but unfortunately it can no longer be edited.
Similar topics