ᐅ Include government subsidies (such as KfW and L-Bank) in the house construction schedule for better planning.

KarstenausNRW schrieb:

Have a look in the forum for information on this. @11ant will probably add his input soon ;-)

I’m currently unsure whether the original poster may have already read my house-building schedule (but only partially understood it or misinterpreted the note that it’s also possible to proceed differently):

Let´sBau24 schrieb:

Our plan for the process:
- Finance the land separately (fixed interest rate or variable loan); we still need to get financing offers.
- Survey the land and carry out a soil investigation on the property.
- Commission an architect for service phases 1-2 to create a preliminary design.
- Based on the preliminary design results, the land survey, and the soil investigation, collect offers from home builders and at the same time request a cost estimate from an earthworks contractor (excavation, landfill, etc.) to enable better planning. (I’m aware that other ancillary construction costs apply, but I consider this the largest cost factor which I want to plan for as accurately as possible at this stage.)
- After we get confirmation that we are generally eligible for funding, we would decide on a construction company (after comparing offers in parallel).
- In parallel, finalize the rest of the financing.
[...] Do you generally think this approach makes sense?

On the one hand, I’m pleased to see someone planning to commission “Module A” and use its outcome for an initial request for bids (even without specifying the building method). That sounds reasonable. What seems less wise to me is putting the assessment “rock or swamp” behind (instead of before) Module A with the architect. Also, I miss how the planning process should proceed afterward, since service phase 3 is definitely recommended to be done with the (same?) architect. And it’s still unclear to me what could still jeopardize funding eligibility if the builders themselves have been positively pre-approved (?).

KarstenausNRW schrieb:

Just a few questions:
1. Why do you want to have the land surveyed again?
2. Why service phases 1+2 with the architect and then go to a home building company?
3. What do you understand by “home building company”?
4. Why an earthworks contractor if you’re going with a “home building company”?
5. How do you plan to compare offers from “home building companies” objectively? There is no one in your plan preparing a tender.

Let´sBau24 schrieb:

5. We want to approach the home builders with the preliminary design created in service phases 1+2 and get quotes exactly for those floor plans.
I don’t know if I have a misunderstanding,

If I understand correctly, the municipality has so far only mentally allocated the building plots, but the parcels have not yet been surveyed. Regarding whether the lots for earthworks and shell construction should be awarded separately, I would not second-guess the architect. The result of the preliminary design phase is generally NOT suitable for concrete price requests, but only for a rough assessment of whether the specific building project is better or cheaper to build with timber or masonry construction. The results of this inquiry round do not necessarily lead to a decision—neither whether timber or masonry, nor whether a single general contractor or award decisions only after tender.

At one extreme (general contractor and timber), the architect only performs service phase 3 after this “proofing,” and the general contractor takes over. At the other extreme (masonry and award after tender), the architect completes the entire “Module B” (and then also C).

Let´sBau24 schrieb:

Our goal is to build a single-family house with around 130-140sqm (1400-1500 sq ft) of living space.

That sounds reasonable...

Let´sBau24 schrieb:

We want to start building in 1-2 years. [...]
Both aged 31, employed, wife on parental leave (max 2 more years), then part-time. We have two children (2 years and 1 month old).

...this part seems less so. I suspect the end of parental leave is the motive for waiting and also influences financing. To that extent, waiting is relatively understandable. Absolutely considered, however, delaying the build is not a smart strategic choice. What would be the consequence of building with income during parental leave and/or without counting funding: thirty square meters less?—or for a while just paved parking spaces instead of a double garage?

With manageable compromises, I would not intentionally delay building; the move-in will only happen once child 1 can walk and child 2 is potty trained anyway. After bark beetles, COVID, and the Ukraine crisis, new obstacles will arise, so hoping for cheaper construction costs is illusory. My motto is “build now” for good reason.

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

11ant schrieb:

I would not artificially delay construction over manageable compromises; moving in will only happen once K1 can already operate and K2 is house-trained. After bark beetles, Corona, and Putin, new challenges will arise to dash hopes of cheaper building costs. My motto "build now" is not without reason.

And basically, you already sense this yourself, as the name @Let´sBau24 suggests: not ~26.

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/