ᐅ Initial Consultation / Architect Selection

stfn_86 schrieb:


That's exactly my question. We had a conversation with an architect some time ago whose preferred working model is "design phases 1-4, then general contractor (GC)." One of the architects we're speaking with next week seems to primarily work as a GC.

Your concern about ending up with the wrong person is definitely justified! Choosing the right one requires both luck and judgment. You can already forget about the first option you mentioned (design phases 1-4, then GC). It’s not about what the architect prefers, but what works best for you. And clearly, he prefers those initial phases where he can earn good money with relatively little effort. The later phases are also well paid but require harder-earned money... At least he doesn’t claim to do through design phase 5 and then GC—because then you’d pay twice.

Ultimately, it should be your decision whether and when to involve a GC.

Gerddieter

Gerddieter schrieb:

At least he doesn't claim up to design phase 5 and then general contractor - that way you pay twice...

What do you think is paid twice?

Gerddieter schrieb:

It should remain your decision when to appoint the general contractor.

Yes, but not during the current tender. If my brother-in-law is a roofer, I would tell the architect in advance not to include that trade in the tender. Otherwise, I would never instruct the architect on when to appoint the general contractor and when not.

---

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

You can significantly shorten your list for the initial meeting since these are just technical framework conditions. What is your goal? Do you want to avoid ending up with the wrong architect like @pagoni2020, or would you rather find the right one?

Pay attention to how @ypg mentions the importance of sympathy. Without it, nothing will work. It is a deal breaker—regardless of price, references, or the size of the firm.

Ask during a conversation, not like an interrogation:

• Why did they become an architect? Passion is important for the best results.
• What satisfies them most in their work? If they genuinely put their clients at the center, that’s a good sign.
• Which of their projects is especially close to their heart, and ask them to explain why. If their answers align with your goals: very good.
• What do they expect from you as clients?
• How do they approach working together to develop a design? If they suggest ideas without genuinely considering your requirements, they’re out. More than just “What is the budget, size, plot, number of rooms...” needs to come from them.

That’s basically enough. With an architect, it’s like with a doctor or a lawyer: experience and education are important, but what really matters is their interest in you and your project—not just the contract value.

We ended up working with an architect who had two employees, mostly worked on commercial buildings rather than private homes, had no website, and no public reviews. Everyone was incredibly enthusiastic about the project. The result reflected that, and the price was fair. We commissioned each phase step by step, and from the construction management stage on, we took over everything ourselves with the carpenter as the main contact and coordinator.

11ant schrieb:

What do you think is being paid for twice?

The service phase 5 – which is not exactly cheap.

The architect who has the client’s best interests at heart confirms that a general contractor (GC) will not be diverted from their own shop drawings...

Every GC has their "specials" – their own cost-effective standard staircase, standard roof truss, etc., which they want to include in the execution planning.
The architect who designed the project then sensibly takes on a supervisory role here – which costs money – but not the full fee of service phase 5.

Gerddieter

I can only share how I chose my architect. I had two informal conversations with two architects. Both were recommended to me by trusted acquaintances. After that, it was a gut feeling decision, which I have not regretted almost a year later (the shell construction phase has just been contracted).

Gerddieter schrieb:

The architect who has the client’s best interests at heart confirms that a general contractor won’t be swayed from their own detailed construction planning...

However, the contractor can only get away with this if the client is satisfied with the so-called “site manager” of the general contractor and does not have construction supervision carried out by their independent architect.

Gerddieter schrieb:

Every general contractor has their “specials” – their own inexpensive stair builder, standard roof truss system, etc., which they like to include in the execution planning...

If the architect’s execution planning is available, I would call it fraud if the general contractor received the contract through the tender process. In that case, they are obliged to deliver exactly what was ordered.

That is why I always say that only a fool goes to someone with architectural plans who treats those plans as nothing more than paper and spends their days quietly laughing behind the client’s back. An architectural plan has value only if the author is also allowed to supervise its implementation. Half measures are nonsense.

---

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