Hello,
we are currently looking for an architect in Berlin. The first one we contacted immediately quoted the maximum fee allowed according to the fee schedule. That really surprised me. How much did your architects charge?
Katharina
we are currently looking for an architect in Berlin. The first one we contacted immediately quoted the maximum fee allowed according to the fee schedule. That really surprised me. How much did your architects charge?
Katharina
H
Honigkuchen15 Jan 2009 09:23Architect, HOAI, Service Phases, Part 1 of 2
Hello dear tigermaus,
Be careful, this will be a very long text
I hope you won’t get too tired reading it.
- So, we haven’t built ourselves yet, and I’m a complete layperson, so I only know what I have read on the internet and in magazines/books (and I always hope that's all correct ) – so just a little on that:
I told an architect we were considering about our current status (plot found, house size roughly clear, construction type (solid/masonry) clear, number of floors clear, finished/unfinished clear, required rooms, number and approximate location clear, etc.), and he told me that service phase 1 would be done for him; maybe he’s trying to lure us in because for all other phases he charges the middle rate, which I personally find a bit steep for all phases...
I see this also as a kind of negotiation basis on his part, meaning he might be willing to negotiate his rates in some areas.
Besides, some of the service phases, at least partially, can be delegated to others; whether this is financially beneficial overall (since the new people also need to be instructed, and some will be billed according to the architects’ fee structure HOAI) is something to consider individually.
For Service Phase 1 (preliminary investigation) it says:
Service Phase 1, the Preliminary Investigation (3%)
Basic Services
Clarification of the task
Consultation on the overall service requirements
Formulation of decision-making aids for selecting other professionals involved in planning
Summary of results
Additional Services
Inventory survey
Site analysis
Compilation of a space and function program
Review of environmental impacts and environmental compatibility
Have a look at the basic services; maybe those are already complete in your case.
The additional services, which exist for all phases and usually trigger extra charges, must be considered separately; so, those add up.
The architect should clearly prove which services he actually provides for you in Service Phase 1.
If you demonstrate your knowledge and say to him:
"According to Service Phase 1, these and those tasks are included, but they are already resolved on our side, so you don’t need to invest more work in them, etc.," you might get him to speak with you on equal terms instead of just applying flat rates without explaining.
Ask him to disclose which services he will perform in each service phase; this also determines the maximum he can charge.
The percentages given per phase, to my knowledge, always refer to the entire service phase block.
Meaning: If he only performs part of a service phase because either
a) not all parts are needed or
b) parts were or will be completed by others,
then he obviously cannot charge you for those.
- A little trick here:
He might not charge you for all parts of one phase, but instead of charging the quarter rate, he might charge the middle rate, or instead of the middle rate the three-quarter rate, and so on...
Always important:
Ask to see references of the architect; not just 2 or 3, but 20.
Talk to former clients he has worked with.
Not only those he knows will say good things about him.
(The same applies for property developers!)
Do not rush such things; this is way too much money to take risks casually.
Service Phase 1: The Preliminary Investigation:
“In Service Phase 1, the architect establishes the basis for your more detailed planning. This includes, for example, gathering your construction ideas and financial possibilities, a joint inspection of the plot of land, consulting on the overall scope of services, defining further specialist planners, and finally summarizing the initial consultations.
The fee share for these services usually amounts to 3% of the total.”
Generally, all regional architects’ chambers probably have some kind of member list with an integrated search function, enabling you to select areas of expertise, e.g. "single-family homes," or even better (if available): "passive house construction" or something similar.
I haven’t looked at all chambers, of course :- )
But if needed, call them (depending on which region or state you live in). They will surely assist you.
Regarding passive or low-energy houses:
Of course, a passive house consumes much less energy than a low-energy house (like roughly KfW 40 standard).
You should keep in mind that a passive house a) costs more and b) you barely need any heating; I don’t know how that works with tiled floors, whether they might always feel cold; that is partly why we decided against a passive house and instead chose (yes, we are climate/energy sinners...) a low-energy house with underfloor heating. It has always been our dream, and it’s great for kids and pets too.
And, as I said, cost is a very important factor.
It’s also important to mention that the architect calculates his fee based on the (net)TOTAL COST(S) of the construction project.
If your house costs 119,000 Euros gross (including VAT), he calculates his fee on 100,000 Euros net (excluding VAT).
That would be 10,000 Euros for him.
For a house costing 250,000–300,000 Euros (which is common), the fee would be 25,000–30,000 Euros.
So it’s even more important to review which services you might be able to omit and possibly assign to others if necessary.
AND what we are planning to save on architect fees:
We intend to have some of the features we want installed LATER (maybe immediately after the house is finished).
But only less important things – NOTHING that affects the building envelope or energy efficiency.
Good insulation, walls, windows, doors, everything relevant for the building envelope (and relevant for any possible warranty claims) must be in place!
And countless conduit pipes and structural preparations for things to be installed later.
Here is an example:
We plan to build a house with ground floor, first floor, and attic (probably a hip roof).
Since it’s just the two of us now and it will be a few years before we have children, we currently only need one finished floor –
(In our case, the first floor, as that is at street level since it is a sloped plot.)
The ground floor (garden level) and attic will initially remain relatively "raw," meaning unfinished.
We want solar collectors with buffer storage, a rainwater cistern (for garden irrigation, washing machine, toilet flushing), possibly additional grey water system, underfloor heating, a fireplace stove (combined) for firewood plus pellets that can also heat domestic hot water (so heat is supplied to the buffer storage, just like the heat from the solar collectors), a ventilation system with heat recovery which can also support heating or hot water heating; and we are also planning ahead for old age, so want a shaft (maybe about 1.2 by 1.5 meters or so; to be finalized) that can later be used as an elevator shaft if one of us is no longer able to walk, and preparation for a bus system, i.e. automated technical stuff like timed roller shutters, alarm system integration, etc., so probably: conduit pipes, conduit pipes, conduit pipes. They say you can never have too many.
(Hope our house won’t end up looking like Swiss cheese... haha)
And maybe a few more “gadgets” that may be needed one day, we’ll see. I’m currently reading through 50 construction magazines and two dozen building books.
Together with the architect, we’ll probably have EVERYTHING installed only after the really IMMEDIATELY NECESSARY things are done!
Because anything that is NOT installed/done while the architect is still involved saves us architect fees!
In our case, we would probably only install underfloor heating in the one finished floor, and the fireplace stove that heats the water for the underfloor heating and our shower water; if we start building in spring (solid construction), and hopefully move in by winter, the heating and hot water supply should then be secured.
EVERYTHING ELSE, like finishing the other two floors (flooring, sanitary fixtures like bathtub, shower base, toilet, washbasin, etc., partition walls for the rooms, etc.) comes later, after the house is complete, so that two people can move in with everything needed.
But everything must already be PREPARED, meaning all electrical work should ideally already be installed, sockets and so on, or at least one should know what rooms will be in the unfinished floors, and accordingly already have conduit pipes and socket preparations on the exterior walls in the right places.
And if you want a toilet, bathroom, kitchen, or similar in the unfinished floors, all the wastewater pipes and similar must also be prepared.
Let’s assume (numbers probably not accurate, just an example) a fully finished house would cost you 300,000 Euros (net).
A partially finished house would cost 200,000 Euros (net).
The architect calculates his fee based on the 200,000 Euros.
Once you “get rid of him” and he has fulfilled his duties, you can, if you want, have the rest of the house finished later; possibly with the same trade companies who did the first part if you liked their work.
IMPORTANT: – or I’ll get scolded here for my half-knowledge!
Nothing that is important for your passive house may be omitted; nothing relevant to ensure a) it receives the "passive house" status and b) that expensive but crucial passive house components are not left out.
Example:
For a passive house to actually be a passive house, you obviously need well-insulated walls, ceilings, floors, roof; but you also need high-quality (probably triple-glazed) windows (often with inert gas fill), a good front door, everything well sealed (thermal bridges or heat loss usually happen around badly installed windows, for example), and in any highly insulated home you definitely need a ventilation system which may also be connected to the heating circuit, etc.
Depending on your plot’s orientation, you may also need passive solar gain, i.e., large glazed surfaces facing south or similar.
If you want to save on the architect’s fees, please, under no circumstances should you initially cut corners on windows, or insulation of walls, ceilings, floors, roof, etc., thinking “I’ll fix that later.”
1. You may then fail to meet the passive house standard, which means you will need more heating and you’ll freeze in winter because you don’t have proper heating tailored to your house.
2. You will cause yourself unnecessary work and expenses doing insulation retrofits later: removing double-glazed windows (which already cost a lot) to install triple-glazed ones; insulation of the roof, walls, floors, ceilings afterwards… that is way too much work. It’s better to arrange a fixed price from the start.
Only things that can be comfortably installed or done later because all installations/preparations have already been made in advance—such as rainwater cistern, attic finishing, second bathroom fixtures, partition walls, furniture, wallpaper, floors, paint for unfinished floors, elevator/lift shaft, and so on—are what I mean.
Put another way:
You might still be building for 300,000 Euros, because by saving on finishing one or more floors now, you can afford a bigger/better house, so the architect still gets the larger fee—but you can complete the rest of your bigger, better house later, probably without him.
Those are basically the two options you have.
We choose the bigger, better house because in about 10 years we might add an extension to a low-energy house … not sure. Plus, our orientation is awkward so we have to think differently anyway. But everyone must decide for themselves. It depends on what you short-term (just two or three people), medium-term (four, five, six people) and long-term (two again, children moved out, or three people again because of caregiving [parent/child]) will need.
Also, considering old age or potential accidents or illnesses, it’s wise to take a small look at accessibility … Wider doors cost more but are worth it in case of need, because retrofitting walls means possibly damaging the perfect insulation envelope and it might never be restored 100%, depending on who does it.
Walk-in showers probably cost more too, but having one already while you are still young and fit is a real luxury feeling and helps if you are temporarily unwell (e.g. broken leg, heavy cold and tiredness, risk of falling because of high shower threshold, etc.).
The bigger the house, the more it costs — insurance, energy, etc. (although with a passive house… — but more insulated walls, windows, etc. = higher costs) — plus the more cleaning you have to do, so don’t build TOO big.
- Optionally, one floor (or part of it) can be rented out later in old age; i.e., as a granny flat, if that suits your nature (people differ here).
Accordingly, you should plan well based on your short-, medium- and long-term life plans.
- Oh yes, one more thing:
The less living space you initially have, the lower some fees will be...
For example, as long as a basement is only declared as a basement and not as living space, it won’t be counted as living area.
Also, this allows some flexibility; you can adjust the planning of yet unfinished rooms depending on the situation.
- I would appreciate if experienced people could comment on my points. I don’t want to give wrong advice here.
This is just what I gathered as an essence from the internet, construction logs, magazines, and so on.
- Okay, I hope I haven’t written too confusingly. I had only one coffee at first
Best regards,
Honigkuchen
tigermaus schrieb:
What exactly is included in the preliminary investigation? We already have a plot of land and fairly clear ideas, but the architect still wants the 3%. Plus something extra for the structural engineering and something extra for "technical installations." Is that normal? It all adds up to 13%, which can’t be right.
By the way, we want to build a passive house, and there aren’t many architects who really know about that.
Best regards, tigermaus
Hello dear tigermaus,
Be careful, this will be a very long text
I hope you won’t get too tired reading it.
- So, we haven’t built ourselves yet, and I’m a complete layperson, so I only know what I have read on the internet and in magazines/books (and I always hope that's all correct ) – so just a little on that:
I told an architect we were considering about our current status (plot found, house size roughly clear, construction type (solid/masonry) clear, number of floors clear, finished/unfinished clear, required rooms, number and approximate location clear, etc.), and he told me that service phase 1 would be done for him; maybe he’s trying to lure us in because for all other phases he charges the middle rate, which I personally find a bit steep for all phases...
I see this also as a kind of negotiation basis on his part, meaning he might be willing to negotiate his rates in some areas.
Besides, some of the service phases, at least partially, can be delegated to others; whether this is financially beneficial overall (since the new people also need to be instructed, and some will be billed according to the architects’ fee structure HOAI) is something to consider individually.
For Service Phase 1 (preliminary investigation) it says:
Service Phase 1, the Preliminary Investigation (3%)
Basic Services
Clarification of the task
Consultation on the overall service requirements
Formulation of decision-making aids for selecting other professionals involved in planning
Summary of results
Additional Services
Inventory survey
Site analysis
Compilation of a space and function program
Review of environmental impacts and environmental compatibility
Have a look at the basic services; maybe those are already complete in your case.
The additional services, which exist for all phases and usually trigger extra charges, must be considered separately; so, those add up.
The architect should clearly prove which services he actually provides for you in Service Phase 1.
If you demonstrate your knowledge and say to him:
"According to Service Phase 1, these and those tasks are included, but they are already resolved on our side, so you don’t need to invest more work in them, etc.," you might get him to speak with you on equal terms instead of just applying flat rates without explaining.
Ask him to disclose which services he will perform in each service phase; this also determines the maximum he can charge.
The percentages given per phase, to my knowledge, always refer to the entire service phase block.
Meaning: If he only performs part of a service phase because either
a) not all parts are needed or
b) parts were or will be completed by others,
then he obviously cannot charge you for those.
- A little trick here:
He might not charge you for all parts of one phase, but instead of charging the quarter rate, he might charge the middle rate, or instead of the middle rate the three-quarter rate, and so on...
Always important:
Ask to see references of the architect; not just 2 or 3, but 20.
Talk to former clients he has worked with.
Not only those he knows will say good things about him.
(The same applies for property developers!)
Do not rush such things; this is way too much money to take risks casually.
Service Phase 1: The Preliminary Investigation:
“In Service Phase 1, the architect establishes the basis for your more detailed planning. This includes, for example, gathering your construction ideas and financial possibilities, a joint inspection of the plot of land, consulting on the overall scope of services, defining further specialist planners, and finally summarizing the initial consultations.
The fee share for these services usually amounts to 3% of the total.”
Generally, all regional architects’ chambers probably have some kind of member list with an integrated search function, enabling you to select areas of expertise, e.g. "single-family homes," or even better (if available): "passive house construction" or something similar.
I haven’t looked at all chambers, of course :- )
But if needed, call them (depending on which region or state you live in). They will surely assist you.
Regarding passive or low-energy houses:
Of course, a passive house consumes much less energy than a low-energy house (like roughly KfW 40 standard).
You should keep in mind that a passive house a) costs more and b) you barely need any heating; I don’t know how that works with tiled floors, whether they might always feel cold; that is partly why we decided against a passive house and instead chose (yes, we are climate/energy sinners...) a low-energy house with underfloor heating. It has always been our dream, and it’s great for kids and pets too.
And, as I said, cost is a very important factor.
It’s also important to mention that the architect calculates his fee based on the (net)TOTAL COST(S) of the construction project.
If your house costs 119,000 Euros gross (including VAT), he calculates his fee on 100,000 Euros net (excluding VAT).
That would be 10,000 Euros for him.
For a house costing 250,000–300,000 Euros (which is common), the fee would be 25,000–30,000 Euros.
So it’s even more important to review which services you might be able to omit and possibly assign to others if necessary.
AND what we are planning to save on architect fees:
We intend to have some of the features we want installed LATER (maybe immediately after the house is finished).
But only less important things – NOTHING that affects the building envelope or energy efficiency.
Good insulation, walls, windows, doors, everything relevant for the building envelope (and relevant for any possible warranty claims) must be in place!
And countless conduit pipes and structural preparations for things to be installed later.
Here is an example:
We plan to build a house with ground floor, first floor, and attic (probably a hip roof).
Since it’s just the two of us now and it will be a few years before we have children, we currently only need one finished floor –
(In our case, the first floor, as that is at street level since it is a sloped plot.)
The ground floor (garden level) and attic will initially remain relatively "raw," meaning unfinished.
We want solar collectors with buffer storage, a rainwater cistern (for garden irrigation, washing machine, toilet flushing), possibly additional grey water system, underfloor heating, a fireplace stove (combined) for firewood plus pellets that can also heat domestic hot water (so heat is supplied to the buffer storage, just like the heat from the solar collectors), a ventilation system with heat recovery which can also support heating or hot water heating; and we are also planning ahead for old age, so want a shaft (maybe about 1.2 by 1.5 meters or so; to be finalized) that can later be used as an elevator shaft if one of us is no longer able to walk, and preparation for a bus system, i.e. automated technical stuff like timed roller shutters, alarm system integration, etc., so probably: conduit pipes, conduit pipes, conduit pipes. They say you can never have too many.
(Hope our house won’t end up looking like Swiss cheese... haha)
And maybe a few more “gadgets” that may be needed one day, we’ll see. I’m currently reading through 50 construction magazines and two dozen building books.
Together with the architect, we’ll probably have EVERYTHING installed only after the really IMMEDIATELY NECESSARY things are done!
Because anything that is NOT installed/done while the architect is still involved saves us architect fees!
In our case, we would probably only install underfloor heating in the one finished floor, and the fireplace stove that heats the water for the underfloor heating and our shower water; if we start building in spring (solid construction), and hopefully move in by winter, the heating and hot water supply should then be secured.
EVERYTHING ELSE, like finishing the other two floors (flooring, sanitary fixtures like bathtub, shower base, toilet, washbasin, etc., partition walls for the rooms, etc.) comes later, after the house is complete, so that two people can move in with everything needed.
But everything must already be PREPARED, meaning all electrical work should ideally already be installed, sockets and so on, or at least one should know what rooms will be in the unfinished floors, and accordingly already have conduit pipes and socket preparations on the exterior walls in the right places.
And if you want a toilet, bathroom, kitchen, or similar in the unfinished floors, all the wastewater pipes and similar must also be prepared.
Let’s assume (numbers probably not accurate, just an example) a fully finished house would cost you 300,000 Euros (net).
A partially finished house would cost 200,000 Euros (net).
The architect calculates his fee based on the 200,000 Euros.
Once you “get rid of him” and he has fulfilled his duties, you can, if you want, have the rest of the house finished later; possibly with the same trade companies who did the first part if you liked their work.
IMPORTANT: – or I’ll get scolded here for my half-knowledge!
Nothing that is important for your passive house may be omitted; nothing relevant to ensure a) it receives the "passive house" status and b) that expensive but crucial passive house components are not left out.
Example:
For a passive house to actually be a passive house, you obviously need well-insulated walls, ceilings, floors, roof; but you also need high-quality (probably triple-glazed) windows (often with inert gas fill), a good front door, everything well sealed (thermal bridges or heat loss usually happen around badly installed windows, for example), and in any highly insulated home you definitely need a ventilation system which may also be connected to the heating circuit, etc.
Depending on your plot’s orientation, you may also need passive solar gain, i.e., large glazed surfaces facing south or similar.
If you want to save on the architect’s fees, please, under no circumstances should you initially cut corners on windows, or insulation of walls, ceilings, floors, roof, etc., thinking “I’ll fix that later.”
1. You may then fail to meet the passive house standard, which means you will need more heating and you’ll freeze in winter because you don’t have proper heating tailored to your house.
2. You will cause yourself unnecessary work and expenses doing insulation retrofits later: removing double-glazed windows (which already cost a lot) to install triple-glazed ones; insulation of the roof, walls, floors, ceilings afterwards… that is way too much work. It’s better to arrange a fixed price from the start.
Only things that can be comfortably installed or done later because all installations/preparations have already been made in advance—such as rainwater cistern, attic finishing, second bathroom fixtures, partition walls, furniture, wallpaper, floors, paint for unfinished floors, elevator/lift shaft, and so on—are what I mean.
Put another way:
You might still be building for 300,000 Euros, because by saving on finishing one or more floors now, you can afford a bigger/better house, so the architect still gets the larger fee—but you can complete the rest of your bigger, better house later, probably without him.
Those are basically the two options you have.
We choose the bigger, better house because in about 10 years we might add an extension to a low-energy house … not sure. Plus, our orientation is awkward so we have to think differently anyway. But everyone must decide for themselves. It depends on what you short-term (just two or three people), medium-term (four, five, six people) and long-term (two again, children moved out, or three people again because of caregiving [parent/child]) will need.
Also, considering old age or potential accidents or illnesses, it’s wise to take a small look at accessibility … Wider doors cost more but are worth it in case of need, because retrofitting walls means possibly damaging the perfect insulation envelope and it might never be restored 100%, depending on who does it.
Walk-in showers probably cost more too, but having one already while you are still young and fit is a real luxury feeling and helps if you are temporarily unwell (e.g. broken leg, heavy cold and tiredness, risk of falling because of high shower threshold, etc.).
The bigger the house, the more it costs — insurance, energy, etc. (although with a passive house… — but more insulated walls, windows, etc. = higher costs) — plus the more cleaning you have to do, so don’t build TOO big.
- Optionally, one floor (or part of it) can be rented out later in old age; i.e., as a granny flat, if that suits your nature (people differ here).
Accordingly, you should plan well based on your short-, medium- and long-term life plans.
- Oh yes, one more thing:
The less living space you initially have, the lower some fees will be...
For example, as long as a basement is only declared as a basement and not as living space, it won’t be counted as living area.
Also, this allows some flexibility; you can adjust the planning of yet unfinished rooms depending on the situation.
- I would appreciate if experienced people could comment on my points. I don’t want to give wrong advice here.
This is just what I gathered as an essence from the internet, construction logs, magazines, and so on.
- Okay, I hope I haven’t written too confusingly. I had only one coffee at first
Best regards,
Honigkuchen
Hello Katharina "Stadthausblog," hello Honigkuchen and all other future homeowners,
Honigkuchen has clearly put a lot of effort into this. However, in my opinion, there are some misunderstandings present, which I will address later.
First, I would like to clarify the fees of an architect or structural engineer. The fees for these freelance professions are regulated by the HOAI (Official Scale of Fees for Services by Architects and Engineers), which has legal status.
It is important to note that the fee rates in the HOAI tables were last adjusted on 01/01/1996, about 13 years ago, to account for general price increases. This means that these professions have not received any "salary increase" for 13 years. With this background, it is easy to understand how an architect or structural engineer might feel when clients try to push fees that are already insufficient even lower.
Because of this, a structural engineer with 10 years of experience earns about the same salary as a factory line worker. This is also one of the reasons why there is a shortage of young professionals entering these very interesting engineering fields.
Now back to the HOAI:
There are five different zones reflecting the difficulty level of the respective planning task. From Zone I with very low requirements through Zone III with average requirements, to Zone V with very high planning demands.
For example, a typical single-family house falls under Zone III for architectural services and Zone II for structural engineering services.
Additionally, the services of an architect/structural engineer are divided into 9 different service phases (the following percentages apply to buildings):
Phase 1: Basic evaluation, accounting for 3% of the total fee
Phase 2: Preliminary design, 7%
Phase 3: Design development, 11%
Phase 4: Building permit planning, 6%
Phase 5: Detailed design, 25%
From this point, construction management begins.
Phase 6: Preparation for tendering, 10%
Phase 7: Assistance with awarding contracts, 4%
Phase 8: Site supervision, 31%
Phase 9: Project closeout and documentation, 3%
This shows how the planning phases (totaling 52%) and the construction management phases (totaling 48%) complement each other.
Here, based on my understanding of Honigkuchen’s remarks, there is a misconception:
Even for elements that are initially not going to be installed but must be planned for, the architect/engineer is entitled to the planning fee. So, savings on fees can only be made in the area of construction management.
For elements not supervised during construction management, the architect or engineer is naturally not liable.
From a legal standpoint, this puts the homeowner on shaky ground.
Furthermore, the fee tables specify minimum and maximum rates within which the fees may vary. Larger firms usually have higher overhead costs.
Now to the example houses:
For a house with a net finished construction cost (excluding VAT) of €100,000, the architect’s fee according to §16 HOAI for all basic services across all phases (1–9) ranges between €11,311 and €14,360 plus VAT.
Special services are billed separately.
If certain services are not provided or required, the fee decreases accordingly.
The structural engineer’s fee is calculated differently than the architect’s fee, based on the net shell construction cost.
Assuming this is about 45% of the finished construction cost (i.e., €45,000), the corresponding structural engineering fees according to §65 HOAI (Zone II) range between €3,945 and €5,186 plus VAT.
Special services are also billed separately but occur less frequently.
In the case of a normal single-family home, additional specialized engineers—except for surveyors—are rarely involved. We will leave those aside here.
Thus, for a house built at a gross price of €119,000, architect and engineering fees together amount to approximately between €15,256 and €19,546.
For an example house with a finished construction cost of €300,000 (net) and a shell construction cost of €135,000 (net), i.e., 45%, the fees under the same conditions are as follows:
Architect: €30,650 to €37,643
Structural engineer: €12,352.40 to €15,695.20
Total: €43,002.40 to €53,338.20
Now I want to examine how much fee would be saved if the house is not fully completed under construction management. As previously explained, the planning fees remain the same.
The structural engineer would also receive the same fee because the shell construction cost does not change.
Only in the area of construction management would fees be saved.
This results in the following calculation:
Architect planning: €30,650 × 52% = €15,938 or €37,643 × 52% = €19,574.36
Architect construction management: based on a finished construction cost of €200,000 (net), €16,920 × 48% = €8,121.60 or €21,394 × 48% = €10,269.12
Compared to these values:
Architect planning: €15,938 to €19,574.36
Architect construction management: €8,121.60 to €10,269.12
Structural engineer: €12,352.40 to €15,695.20
Total: €36,412 to €45,538.68
The supposed savings would be between €6,590.40 and €7,799.52, which is about 15% of the original total fee or about 21% of the original architect’s fee.
In this case, the homeowner would need to take on about two-thirds of the total construction management tasks or one-third of the total architect’s services.
This is just an example using Honigkuchen’s figures.
Of course, the question arises whether the house can be finished to a habitable standard with a construction cost of €65,000 (i.e., €200,000 - €135,000 net) under construction management. If not, the supposed savings would be proportionally smaller.
Anyone considering this should also be aware that they take sole responsibility for the remaining finishing work (quantity surveying, tendering, awarding contracts, and supervision), and the former construction manager assumes no liability for this.
I hope I was able to contribute some clarification.
Best regards,
Danton
Engineering and Planning Office
Dipl.-Ing. Thomas Brandenburg
Consulting Engineer and Building Expert
Insurance Specialist (Construction Contract)
Honigkuchen has clearly put a lot of effort into this. However, in my opinion, there are some misunderstandings present, which I will address later.
First, I would like to clarify the fees of an architect or structural engineer. The fees for these freelance professions are regulated by the HOAI (Official Scale of Fees for Services by Architects and Engineers), which has legal status.
It is important to note that the fee rates in the HOAI tables were last adjusted on 01/01/1996, about 13 years ago, to account for general price increases. This means that these professions have not received any "salary increase" for 13 years. With this background, it is easy to understand how an architect or structural engineer might feel when clients try to push fees that are already insufficient even lower.
Because of this, a structural engineer with 10 years of experience earns about the same salary as a factory line worker. This is also one of the reasons why there is a shortage of young professionals entering these very interesting engineering fields.
Now back to the HOAI:
There are five different zones reflecting the difficulty level of the respective planning task. From Zone I with very low requirements through Zone III with average requirements, to Zone V with very high planning demands.
For example, a typical single-family house falls under Zone III for architectural services and Zone II for structural engineering services.
Additionally, the services of an architect/structural engineer are divided into 9 different service phases (the following percentages apply to buildings):
Phase 1: Basic evaluation, accounting for 3% of the total fee
Phase 2: Preliminary design, 7%
Phase 3: Design development, 11%
Phase 4: Building permit planning, 6%
Phase 5: Detailed design, 25%
From this point, construction management begins.
Phase 6: Preparation for tendering, 10%
Phase 7: Assistance with awarding contracts, 4%
Phase 8: Site supervision, 31%
Phase 9: Project closeout and documentation, 3%
This shows how the planning phases (totaling 52%) and the construction management phases (totaling 48%) complement each other.
Here, based on my understanding of Honigkuchen’s remarks, there is a misconception:
Even for elements that are initially not going to be installed but must be planned for, the architect/engineer is entitled to the planning fee. So, savings on fees can only be made in the area of construction management.
For elements not supervised during construction management, the architect or engineer is naturally not liable.
From a legal standpoint, this puts the homeowner on shaky ground.
Furthermore, the fee tables specify minimum and maximum rates within which the fees may vary. Larger firms usually have higher overhead costs.
Now to the example houses:
For a house with a net finished construction cost (excluding VAT) of €100,000, the architect’s fee according to §16 HOAI for all basic services across all phases (1–9) ranges between €11,311 and €14,360 plus VAT.
Special services are billed separately.
If certain services are not provided or required, the fee decreases accordingly.
The structural engineer’s fee is calculated differently than the architect’s fee, based on the net shell construction cost.
Assuming this is about 45% of the finished construction cost (i.e., €45,000), the corresponding structural engineering fees according to §65 HOAI (Zone II) range between €3,945 and €5,186 plus VAT.
Special services are also billed separately but occur less frequently.
In the case of a normal single-family home, additional specialized engineers—except for surveyors—are rarely involved. We will leave those aside here.
Thus, for a house built at a gross price of €119,000, architect and engineering fees together amount to approximately between €15,256 and €19,546.
For an example house with a finished construction cost of €300,000 (net) and a shell construction cost of €135,000 (net), i.e., 45%, the fees under the same conditions are as follows:
Architect: €30,650 to €37,643
Structural engineer: €12,352.40 to €15,695.20
Total: €43,002.40 to €53,338.20
Now I want to examine how much fee would be saved if the house is not fully completed under construction management. As previously explained, the planning fees remain the same.
The structural engineer would also receive the same fee because the shell construction cost does not change.
Only in the area of construction management would fees be saved.
This results in the following calculation:
Architect planning: €30,650 × 52% = €15,938 or €37,643 × 52% = €19,574.36
Architect construction management: based on a finished construction cost of €200,000 (net), €16,920 × 48% = €8,121.60 or €21,394 × 48% = €10,269.12
Compared to these values:
Architect planning: €15,938 to €19,574.36
Architect construction management: €8,121.60 to €10,269.12
Structural engineer: €12,352.40 to €15,695.20
Total: €36,412 to €45,538.68
The supposed savings would be between €6,590.40 and €7,799.52, which is about 15% of the original total fee or about 21% of the original architect’s fee.
In this case, the homeowner would need to take on about two-thirds of the total construction management tasks or one-third of the total architect’s services.
This is just an example using Honigkuchen’s figures.
Of course, the question arises whether the house can be finished to a habitable standard with a construction cost of €65,000 (i.e., €200,000 - €135,000 net) under construction management. If not, the supposed savings would be proportionally smaller.
Anyone considering this should also be aware that they take sole responsibility for the remaining finishing work (quantity surveying, tendering, awarding contracts, and supervision), and the former construction manager assumes no liability for this.
I hope I was able to contribute some clarification.
Best regards,
Danton
Engineering and Planning Office
Dipl.-Ing. Thomas Brandenburg
Consulting Engineer and Building Expert
Insurance Specialist (Construction Contract)
Similar topics