After a long search, I found a plot of land and made a decision.
I now have several offers with the following basic details: the cheapest offer with a basement and about 100m2 (1,076 sq ft) of floor area is just under 200,000, fully finished including additional construction costs and all wall/floor work. (This is from a well-known prefab house supplier from Poland.)
When flipping through books on "building affordably," one might think it could be cheaper to have an architect design a small house who uses some tricks to reduce costs, naturally also by sacrificing some comforts?
(1) Do you think the above offer could be made significantly cheaper with a prefab house supplier (without the house being of very poor quality)?
(2) Could it be cheaper to plan an affordable house with the help of an architect and then have a local construction company build it?
It’s certainly not possible to generalize, but your personal experiences here would be an important reference before I spend good money on an architect, only to end up with a house that is clearly more expensive than one of the prefab models.
I now have several offers with the following basic details: the cheapest offer with a basement and about 100m2 (1,076 sq ft) of floor area is just under 200,000, fully finished including additional construction costs and all wall/floor work. (This is from a well-known prefab house supplier from Poland.)
When flipping through books on "building affordably," one might think it could be cheaper to have an architect design a small house who uses some tricks to reduce costs, naturally also by sacrificing some comforts?
(1) Do you think the above offer could be made significantly cheaper with a prefab house supplier (without the house being of very poor quality)?
(2) Could it be cheaper to plan an affordable house with the help of an architect and then have a local construction company build it?
It’s certainly not possible to generalize, but your personal experiences here would be an important reference before I spend good money on an architect, only to end up with a house that is clearly more expensive than one of the prefab models.
bindig schrieb:
Is there any experience or solutions in this forum regarding the point that the architect earns more the more money he wastes? The HOAI – which is not mandatory to apply – is fundamentally designed so that the fee increases with a more complex project – fair enough. And the construction costs (specifically the actual costs) serve as a key reference for this complexity. This is unfortunate for the client. But the solution is not complicated: you can agree with the architect on a lower base fee plus a bonus tied to the degree of budget adherence.
As I wrote elsewhere: an architect is not a notary. Rather, they should be open to treating their fee schedule only as a recommendation or guideline and to include performance-based payment components. In my view, sticking to the budget is a very important interest of the client.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
bindig schrieb:
The question posed by the thread starter also interests me a lot.
Are there any experiences or solutions shared in this forum regarding the point that the architect earns more the more money is wasted? After all, the architect is only human, and voluntary renunciation can hardly be expected.Your quote of the OP as well as your own statements contain the fundamental misconception that the architect spends the money. That is not true; only the client does. If you want the gold-plated faucet, receive an offer for it, and commission it, then yes, the construction costs and the architect’s fee—which is linked to them—increase accordingly. But it is not the architect who is undisciplined, it is the client. So, it’s important to reflect on one’s own responsibility.
Moreover, the architect naturally tracks the budget and should point out if an overrun is likely. If the architect says that €40/m² (about $40/sq ft) for tiles is within the budget and you choose tiles at €60/m² (about $60/sq ft), well...
I find the statements by @11ant a bit surprising.
My previous research on the HOAI showed that it is indeed applicable and binding. Fixed prices are possible under it but must not fall below the minimum rate; otherwise, the agreement is invalid, and the minimum rate must be applied. Just a quick online search confirms this.
Edit: Just read Wikipedia on the HOAI—it is a mandatory federal regulation that must be applied for all covered services. What possibilities do you see to circumvent this, @11ant?
Alex85 schrieb:
It’s not the architect who is undisciplined, Yes and no. Some architects are visionaries and artists who don't really care about the contortions the structural engineer has to go through to make their castles in the air actually buildable, and so on. Also, for example, you can literally "build in" billed hours.
Regarding the HOAI: I am neither a lawyer nor any kind of specialist in these regulations. I think the scales it uses are realistic for practical purposes, and I definitely do not recommend trying to turn architects into discount providers. After all, there are professional liability insurances that also require a reliable standard for coverage. In the end, I don’t want to encourage making architects "cheaper." This means that fees, considering the part of cost control they can influence, should not fall below the lower reference value. Ideally, a success-based fee component is structured so that better performance brings more benefit than poorer performance causes harm. I have even read about this basic idea of such fees in guides written by architects; however, I have not yet heard of any ready-made sample contracts for it. Where exactly a comma must be placed for regulatory compliance—that is beyond my expertise.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Similar topics