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.
O
Oberhäslich3 Jan 2024 15:44I’m not sure if we are talking past each other. I was only referring to the general statement that a basement built in solid construction and an upper floor made of wood is, in my view, more expensive than, for example, a building completely in solid construction. Whether this is true or not, I don’t know; I have already explained my reasoning behind this claim.
I can only repeat myself.
We planned with an office from Innsbruck.
Austria is more expensive than Germany.
Your plot of land also needs to be connected to utilities.
Just our water supply cost 32,000€.
Your sewage line, water, electricity, cistern, and so on will have to be installed into solid rock.
No one here will tell you that your 400 will be enough, because it simply won’t work—it’s not a standard case.
Find a local planner from Austria who can provide you with a reliable cost estimate.
Everything else is just guesswork.
We planned with an office from Innsbruck.
Austria is more expensive than Germany.
Your plot of land also needs to be connected to utilities.
Just our water supply cost 32,000€.
Your sewage line, water, electricity, cistern, and so on will have to be installed into solid rock.
No one here will tell you that your 400 will be enough, because it simply won’t work—it’s not a standard case.
Find a local planner from Austria who can provide you with a reliable cost estimate.
Everything else is just guesswork.
I
IIIIIIIIIIIIII3 Jan 2024 16:56Malunga schrieb:
I can only repeat myself.
We planned with an office from Innsbruck.
Austria is more expensive than Germany.
Your plot also needs to be connected to utilities.
Just our water supply cost 32,000€ (approx. $35,000).
Your sewage pipes, water, electricity, cistern, etc., will have to be installed into the foundation.
No one here will tell you that 400,000€ (approx. $440,000) is enough because it simply isn’t possible since this is not a standard case.
Find a local planner in Austria who can give you a solid cost estimate.
Anything else is just guesswork. My 400,000€ (approx. $440,000) is also only for the house itself.
For utility connections and the foundation slab (or whatever else is required to build a house), an additional 100,000€ (approx. $110,000) is available. If it ends up being 150,000€ (approx. $165,000), that’s also okay. However, 200,000€ (approx. $220,000) would be the absolute maximum.
In my opinion, that should be enough to get a house—also a nice one.
Unfortunately, some numbers have become mixed up over the last few pages.
X
xMisterDx3 Jan 2024 17:02Then all your questions are answered. Good luck!
IIIIIIIIIIIIII schrieb:
In the picture, to the left, exactly south geographically, so it’s a perfect hillside location.
As I mentioned, unfortunately I can’t provide more at the moment. The topographic survey is in progress.
There is no basement since after 1 meter (3 feet) of excavation, you hit solid rock.
Also, nobody wants to build three full stories for 400,000 euros...
My current idea is to have only the wall directly against the slope on the ground floor made of concrete, and build the rest in wood. (No idea if that’s structurally feasible.) Yes, we have done it like this. Concrete on the hillside side, the rest in solid wood.
If you come from the Alpine region, use something local. They understand hillside construction.
Mmh.
Where can you save money? That obviously depends a lot on your priorities. First of all, I would say where you should definitely not save: the architect. You really need to budget for that cost. Trying to plan everything yourself doesn’t help at all—in fact, it usually leads to poorer results and higher expenses.
In general, selecting finishes and fixtures (“sampling” or “selection”) is, of course, a potential area for savings, as was already pointed out by @Oberhäslich in #39.
I would like to highlight three factors that, in my opinion, save money. The first is time. If you’re not under pressure to finish something quickly, you save money and stress. On the one hand, you can do some tasks yourself because you have the time; on the other hand, you can take longer to look for better deals. You wouldn’t have to pay for expensive construction heating if you could simply leave the building standing over the summer. However, nowadays this is less common.
The next factor is experience. If it’s your first time building a house, you obviously don’t have any. But there are others you can ask for advice. This starts with choosing the architect and arranging contracts. The most expensive things are those you have to enforce through legal action later. So it’s better to have contracts reviewed before signing than to have problems afterward. Having a trusted advisor during your first build is priceless. This could even be a knowledgeable relative or a hired expert. It’s also helpful to become familiar with each trade and how work is performed. Ideally, as the client, you should regularly visit the construction site to monitor the quality of the work.
Thirdly, you often save much more by thoroughly comparing, weighing, and negotiating loan offers, rather than deciding against something minor like a laundry chute (which I would consider trivial in relation to the entire project).
Additionally, I want to add that on challenging terrain like yours, it’s best to work with local companies who know the area well and, ideally, have built the neighboring house. Anything that makes construction run smoothly—because planners and contractors understand and can manage the local conditions properly—directly saves money.
Where can you save money? That obviously depends a lot on your priorities. First of all, I would say where you should definitely not save: the architect. You really need to budget for that cost. Trying to plan everything yourself doesn’t help at all—in fact, it usually leads to poorer results and higher expenses.
In general, selecting finishes and fixtures (“sampling” or “selection”) is, of course, a potential area for savings, as was already pointed out by @Oberhäslich in #39.
I would like to highlight three factors that, in my opinion, save money. The first is time. If you’re not under pressure to finish something quickly, you save money and stress. On the one hand, you can do some tasks yourself because you have the time; on the other hand, you can take longer to look for better deals. You wouldn’t have to pay for expensive construction heating if you could simply leave the building standing over the summer. However, nowadays this is less common.
The next factor is experience. If it’s your first time building a house, you obviously don’t have any. But there are others you can ask for advice. This starts with choosing the architect and arranging contracts. The most expensive things are those you have to enforce through legal action later. So it’s better to have contracts reviewed before signing than to have problems afterward. Having a trusted advisor during your first build is priceless. This could even be a knowledgeable relative or a hired expert. It’s also helpful to become familiar with each trade and how work is performed. Ideally, as the client, you should regularly visit the construction site to monitor the quality of the work.
Thirdly, you often save much more by thoroughly comparing, weighing, and negotiating loan offers, rather than deciding against something minor like a laundry chute (which I would consider trivial in relation to the entire project).
Additionally, I want to add that on challenging terrain like yours, it’s best to work with local companies who know the area well and, ideally, have built the neighboring house. Anything that makes construction run smoothly—because planners and contractors understand and can manage the local conditions properly—directly saves money.