ᐅ Planning by a general contractor or an independent architect?
Created on: 14 Mar 2025 13:22
D
Dino548
Hello everyone,
We are at the very beginning of our house-building plans – we have purchased a plot of land, had an initial general discussion with a general contractor (GC), and have many questions.
This is a long text, so I really appreciate any feedback you can give. For better clarity, I have separated and numbered my questions.
We want to build a turnkey house through a solid construction company. A building surveyor we know recommended four companies in our region with whom he has had many years of good experience. Before purchasing our plot, we talked with an architect from one of these companies about our rough ideas. Since we know many other homebuilders have had good experiences with this company, they will be our first contact when things become more concrete.
However, we are wondering whether we should have the entire planning—including the offer—done by this company first, in order to then get offers from competitors, or if we should initially hire an independent architect and finally present the plans created by them to the construction companies. In any case, we want the offers to be reviewed by an expert, because we might not fully understand the scope of services otherwise.
I know similar questions have been discussed often in this forum, but since it was sometimes in a slightly different context, I would be very grateful if you could share your experiences.
Option 1: Planning by the construction company
The architect from the company we spoke to made a generally serious and competent impression on us. However, we felt that he tried to influence our thought process somewhat. For example, he advised us against having a basement regardless of the plot conditions – with rather weak arguments. We found this quite disturbing and wonder if, in future conversations, he might generally try to steer us away from options that are less profitable for the company. We might not always notice this so clearly, as we did with the basement topic.
Of course, you don’t get such an independent planning as you would with a freelance architect from a company. On the other hand, we wonder if a house planned by a construction company tends to be significantly cheaper than one designed by a freelance architect. Many solid builders deny offering standard “cookie-cutter” houses, but it seems likely that they rely on proven layouts that are economically advantageous for them. So my first question:
1. In your opinion, do clients generally save money if the planning is done by the construction company?
It would be perfectly fine for us to use a standard floor plan that is maybe slightly modified in certain details. We don’t necessarily need a fully custom architect-designed house. However, we do expect honest advice during planning that isn’t driven solely by the company’s financial interests.
A second question related to this:
2. Assuming we let the said company do the planning and then take those plans to competitors: In your experience, would competitors be able to work with these plans and provide an offer, or should we expect to have to completely replan everything with each competitor?
Besides the fact that the latter would be very time-consuming, we also wonder how comparable the offers would be if they were based on different plans.
Option 2: Planning by a freelance architect
We see advantages in the independence of freelance architects but, as mentioned above, we wonder if a house planned by an architect tends to be significantly more expensive than one based on a layout a company has already built many times, with a few modifications.
3. Furthermore, we cannot judge whether construction companies can definitely work with plans from an independent architect or if it sometimes happens that they want to create their own plans before making an offer, which would lead to double effort both in terms of time and money. Since we want to get offers from the four mentioned companies, we are interested in ensuring that none is excluded just because they didn’t do the planning themselves.
4. I have noticed there is often discussion about which service phases of an independent architect to commission when building with a general contractor. Some recommend phases 1-3, while others advise against it. What do you think? Which service phases are actually necessary, and which ones are nice to have?
And to conclude:
5. We are wondering which of the two options – 1 or 2 – is overall more time-efficient. Of course, building a house is time-consuming, but currently, we have a tightly scheduled life. If time can be saved in good conscience, that would be an important factor for us.
Many thanks in advance for your answers!
We are at the very beginning of our house-building plans – we have purchased a plot of land, had an initial general discussion with a general contractor (GC), and have many questions.
This is a long text, so I really appreciate any feedback you can give. For better clarity, I have separated and numbered my questions.
We want to build a turnkey house through a solid construction company. A building surveyor we know recommended four companies in our region with whom he has had many years of good experience. Before purchasing our plot, we talked with an architect from one of these companies about our rough ideas. Since we know many other homebuilders have had good experiences with this company, they will be our first contact when things become more concrete.
However, we are wondering whether we should have the entire planning—including the offer—done by this company first, in order to then get offers from competitors, or if we should initially hire an independent architect and finally present the plans created by them to the construction companies. In any case, we want the offers to be reviewed by an expert, because we might not fully understand the scope of services otherwise.
I know similar questions have been discussed often in this forum, but since it was sometimes in a slightly different context, I would be very grateful if you could share your experiences.
Option 1: Planning by the construction company
The architect from the company we spoke to made a generally serious and competent impression on us. However, we felt that he tried to influence our thought process somewhat. For example, he advised us against having a basement regardless of the plot conditions – with rather weak arguments. We found this quite disturbing and wonder if, in future conversations, he might generally try to steer us away from options that are less profitable for the company. We might not always notice this so clearly, as we did with the basement topic.
Of course, you don’t get such an independent planning as you would with a freelance architect from a company. On the other hand, we wonder if a house planned by a construction company tends to be significantly cheaper than one designed by a freelance architect. Many solid builders deny offering standard “cookie-cutter” houses, but it seems likely that they rely on proven layouts that are economically advantageous for them. So my first question:
1. In your opinion, do clients generally save money if the planning is done by the construction company?
It would be perfectly fine for us to use a standard floor plan that is maybe slightly modified in certain details. We don’t necessarily need a fully custom architect-designed house. However, we do expect honest advice during planning that isn’t driven solely by the company’s financial interests.
A second question related to this:
2. Assuming we let the said company do the planning and then take those plans to competitors: In your experience, would competitors be able to work with these plans and provide an offer, or should we expect to have to completely replan everything with each competitor?
Besides the fact that the latter would be very time-consuming, we also wonder how comparable the offers would be if they were based on different plans.
Option 2: Planning by a freelance architect
We see advantages in the independence of freelance architects but, as mentioned above, we wonder if a house planned by an architect tends to be significantly more expensive than one based on a layout a company has already built many times, with a few modifications.
3. Furthermore, we cannot judge whether construction companies can definitely work with plans from an independent architect or if it sometimes happens that they want to create their own plans before making an offer, which would lead to double effort both in terms of time and money. Since we want to get offers from the four mentioned companies, we are interested in ensuring that none is excluded just because they didn’t do the planning themselves.
4. I have noticed there is often discussion about which service phases of an independent architect to commission when building with a general contractor. Some recommend phases 1-3, while others advise against it. What do you think? Which service phases are actually necessary, and which ones are nice to have?
And to conclude:
5. We are wondering which of the two options – 1 or 2 – is overall more time-efficient. Of course, building a house is time-consuming, but currently, we have a tightly scheduled life. If time can be saved in good conscience, that would be an important factor for us.
Many thanks in advance for your answers!
Dino548 schrieb:
He mentioned that if we had him create plans and then ultimately decided on a different general contractor, we would be charged €2000. I think this approach is common? [...] Would every construction company we request a quote from create completely new plans, so that we would have to go through the entire design and planning phase multiple times? The fee to cover the effort of a fixed-price contract architect acting as an overly qualified draftsman is roughly in this range—and it’s also common that this cost is passed on to you if you only have this work done to produce illustrated, unnecessary, and redundant comparison offers. It’s better to let your child, if they can already walk, sketch a house for Santa Claus: it’s much cheaper, and it will even have a little heart around it with “for Dad” written inside. Calling these “serious planning phases” is misleading; it’s more like repeatedly trying to start out in third gear until your play money runs out. The winner is always the construction company you end up with when you are tired, worn out, and low on reserves and time. By the time my “setting of the course” including VAT costs two thousand euros, we would already be talking about a 340 m² (3,658 sq ft) house—just for comparison.
Dino548 schrieb:
From your answer, I understand that it is probably not standard practice to approach competitors with the plans of one construction company? For those prospective homeowners who should seriously consider ending their friendships, this path can unfortunately be called “standard.” The saying “building your first house for an enemy” is a warning—not a recommendation!
Dino548 schrieb:
What would the alternative look like without involving an independent architect? Why would you want an alternative to the right way? The key difference between an advisor and a traitor is precisely that the advisor does not prioritize the interests of a seller. Module A (service phases 1 and 2) is an essential and universal foundation, for which the architect charges you just nine percent of their total fee according to the scale. From Madame Glaskuglia at the fairground, you might get that only a little cheaper—possibly with some cotton candy included.
Buckle up and check your blind spot—if you skip these, you’ve already failed the test. No amount of repeatedly shifting into third gear can replace them.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
W
wiltshire16 Mar 2025 09:54Dino548 schrieb:
I think this approach is common practice?I cannot answer this question about “common practice” due to lack of my own data. If you can use the plan under agreed conditions, then it is transparent and fine.S
Serena_Neubau19 Mar 2025 14:08You are just at the very beginning of your house building plans. The flood of information will overwhelm you at first.
Every general contractor (GC) / house builder or architect usually has their own construction style. You need to find someone who fits your taste and budget.
A GC has the advantage of handling a lot of the work for you. They will suggest many options, and you can then choose from them. With an architect, they usually send you to their suppliers or tradespeople to make selections yourself. This involves more work but can be better if you have specific preferences. However, it can be very exhausting to make so many decisions on your own. Architects also have only a limited number of suppliers and tradespeople and tend to prefer certain building styles. Often, you will have to take care of individual things yourself unless you want to pay a fortune to the architect.
The advantage of working with an architect, on the other hand, is that you usually have more time to make decisions and can still change many things later. With a GC or house builder, everything is planned on a "short-term" basis, and construction usually starts quickly...
My advice:
You should have a clear idea of how you want your house to look before you start and try to find a GC or architect who builds in a similar style. It is best to take your time at first to think about your construction style and what you definitely want. After some research, your view and understanding of what you actually want will often change. Try to inform yourself in advance about every trade and topic so you can participate in many decisions. The flood of information can sometimes be overwhelming, and there is too little time to decide, which often leads to wrong decisions... Ideally, you should take 3–6 months to look around, visiting show villages, tile exhibitions, bricks, plaster, new development areas, building material suppliers, and of course, thoroughly research everything online.
The suggestion from the forum is definitely not a bad idea: first sit down with an architect and plan a house. Then, you can consider whether to build with a GC/house builder or the architect based on the design.
Also, the house builders usually apply pressure once they have planned some things with you...
As another guideline, expect around 3000 euros per square meter for a house with a basic standard, plus the land and additional building-related costs, which are not insignificant...
Every general contractor (GC) / house builder or architect usually has their own construction style. You need to find someone who fits your taste and budget.
A GC has the advantage of handling a lot of the work for you. They will suggest many options, and you can then choose from them. With an architect, they usually send you to their suppliers or tradespeople to make selections yourself. This involves more work but can be better if you have specific preferences. However, it can be very exhausting to make so many decisions on your own. Architects also have only a limited number of suppliers and tradespeople and tend to prefer certain building styles. Often, you will have to take care of individual things yourself unless you want to pay a fortune to the architect.
The advantage of working with an architect, on the other hand, is that you usually have more time to make decisions and can still change many things later. With a GC or house builder, everything is planned on a "short-term" basis, and construction usually starts quickly...
My advice:
You should have a clear idea of how you want your house to look before you start and try to find a GC or architect who builds in a similar style. It is best to take your time at first to think about your construction style and what you definitely want. After some research, your view and understanding of what you actually want will often change. Try to inform yourself in advance about every trade and topic so you can participate in many decisions. The flood of information can sometimes be overwhelming, and there is too little time to decide, which often leads to wrong decisions... Ideally, you should take 3–6 months to look around, visiting show villages, tile exhibitions, bricks, plaster, new development areas, building material suppliers, and of course, thoroughly research everything online.
The suggestion from the forum is definitely not a bad idea: first sit down with an architect and plan a house. Then, you can consider whether to build with a GC/house builder or the architect based on the design.
Also, the house builders usually apply pressure once they have planned some things with you...
As another guideline, expect around 3000 euros per square meter for a house with a basic standard, plus the land and additional building-related costs, which are not insignificant...
N
nordanney19 Mar 2025 14:33Serena_Neubau schrieb:
Each general contractor (GC) or home builder company, as well as architects, usually have their own building style. You need to find someone who fits your taste and budget.
A GC has the advantage that they handle a lot of the work for you. They will propose many options, and you can choose from those. With an architect, they usually refer you to their suppliers or tradespeople for selections. You make the choices yourself there. This involves more effort, but if you have specific wishes, it can be better. However, it can be quite exhausting to make so many decisions on your own. Additionally, architects also have a limited number of suppliers and tradespeople, with tendencies toward certain building styles. Often, you also have to take care of individual matters yourself if you don’t want to pay the architect a fortune. The architect simply designs the house with you. They don’t have prescribed suppliers or tradespeople that you must use. They conduct tenders based exactly on your wishes, and the companies selected by both them and you submit their bids.
This process is just as time-consuming as with a GC but has the advantage that you don’t have to choose between Model A or B of a bathtub; instead, you specify your own requirements.
In short: With a GC, you select from what the GC offers. With an architect, you select the tradesperson who wants to fulfill your wishes.
S
Serena_Neubau19 Mar 2025 15:26nordanney schrieb:
The architect only plans the house together with you. He does not have suppliers or craftsmen that you have to use. He issues tenders exactly according to your wishes, and the companies selected by him and by you submit their offers.
This is just as time-consuming as working with a general contractor. But the advantage is that you do not have to choose between model A and B for the bathtub; instead, you express your own preferences.That is true. But the architect usually contacts only the tradespeople he frequently works with or those from the local area. For craftsmen, participating in such a tender process is a huge effort. Usually, only those tradespeople who realistically see a chance of winning the contract take part in the tender. These tend to be the trades with existing relationships to the architects.From our experience, the architect initially plans based on how he usually designs his houses or what he thinks is correct. If you want something different or have other ideas, it can be difficult to push through, and you often need to take care of many things yourself.
N
nordanney19 Mar 2025 15:35Serena_Neubau schrieb:
But the architect only contacts the tradespeople he frequently works with or those from the local area. The architect does what I, as his client, instruct him to do. And if he puts forward his three top tradespeople, I take the tender documents he prepared (which I paid for) and pass them on to the tradespeople I know, those my acquaintances know, and perhaps some I’ve found regionally based on good reviews.
Serena_Neubau schrieb:
It’s a huge effort for tradespeople to participate in such a tender. Nope. They just need to fill out a detailed list. Anyone who manages their business and pricing well can do this quickly. We’re talking about a single-family house, not a 30,000 m² (323,000 sq ft) office building.
Serena_Neubau schrieb:
From our experience, the architect first designs the way he usually builds houses or thinks is right. Then the initial consultation was poor and/or you didn’t take the lead. Addendum: What the architect thinks is right often makes sense based on their experience. Usually, it’s more about the details (entry area size with suitable wardrobe, stair size/orientation/steepness, etc.).
How many houses have you built with an architect before?
Similar topics