Hello everyone,
As I mentioned in another post, we are considering building a house (1.5 floors plus basement; solid construction; plot of land available).
We have already had initial discussions with a local developer. For various reasons, we are unfortunately not really "enthusiastic" about this option (the contact person was very pushy, the supposedly detailed cost breakdown was a bad joke, etc.).
Now, some friends have advised us to build with an independent architect instead of a developer to save costs. The idea is that the architect would also take on construction supervision (including a construction log, etc.) and ideally coordinate the different trades.
Regardless of the approach, we want to contribute some work ourselves!
We have two main concerns. First, we were told that an architect can only provide an overall price estimate, whereas a developer offers a price guarantee (yes, of course, additional costs will arise here and there in both cases). Second, we cannot imagine that an architect who also takes on construction supervision and coordination would actually be cheaper than a developer.
Can you confirm or contradict this information we have? Do you have any general insights on this topic? Managing coordination ourselves would be incredibly difficult due to professional and personal reasons. Should this responsibility be handled by one knowledgeable person rather than multiple people?
Among our friends, everyone has built with developers, so we have no direct comparison.
A “let’s just give it a try” approach is out of the question for us given the sums involved. We also need a concrete figure before approaching the bank.
I hope you can provide some helpful advice here. Maybe there is one or more (former) homebuilders who have already built (or are building) with an independent architect.
Best regards,
Hausbau18
As I mentioned in another post, we are considering building a house (1.5 floors plus basement; solid construction; plot of land available).
We have already had initial discussions with a local developer. For various reasons, we are unfortunately not really "enthusiastic" about this option (the contact person was very pushy, the supposedly detailed cost breakdown was a bad joke, etc.).
Now, some friends have advised us to build with an independent architect instead of a developer to save costs. The idea is that the architect would also take on construction supervision (including a construction log, etc.) and ideally coordinate the different trades.
Regardless of the approach, we want to contribute some work ourselves!
We have two main concerns. First, we were told that an architect can only provide an overall price estimate, whereas a developer offers a price guarantee (yes, of course, additional costs will arise here and there in both cases). Second, we cannot imagine that an architect who also takes on construction supervision and coordination would actually be cheaper than a developer.
Can you confirm or contradict this information we have? Do you have any general insights on this topic? Managing coordination ourselves would be incredibly difficult due to professional and personal reasons. Should this responsibility be handled by one knowledgeable person rather than multiple people?
Among our friends, everyone has built with developers, so we have no direct comparison.
A “let’s just give it a try” approach is out of the question for us given the sums involved. We also need a concrete figure before approaching the bank.
I hope you can provide some helpful advice here. Maybe there is one or more (former) homebuilders who have already built (or are building) with an independent architect.
Best regards,
Hausbau18
We are currently building with a general contractor (GC), and so far we would choose to build with them again.
- flexible planning
- high transparency (there is no separate description of construction services; instead, there is a cost estimate from the very beginning, which makes it easy to add or remove items)
- all craftsmen come from the local area
- trades can be outsourced and replaced with own labor
A few towns away, someone had the shell construction completed by the GC, uses all materials from that GC, and receives professional support whenever they run into problems.
An acquaintance built with a very small GC; she was even able to say, "I want the windows from that window company, I will assist with filling and sanding, have the living room parquet flooring installed, and we will do the laminate flooring in the children’s room ourselves."
There are GCs that are flexible enough to offset the usual disadvantages.
As for whether a profit of 60,000 euros remains per house, I consider that to be just a myth.
- flexible planning
- high transparency (there is no separate description of construction services; instead, there is a cost estimate from the very beginning, which makes it easy to add or remove items)
- all craftsmen come from the local area
- trades can be outsourced and replaced with own labor
A few towns away, someone had the shell construction completed by the GC, uses all materials from that GC, and receives professional support whenever they run into problems.
An acquaintance built with a very small GC; she was even able to say, "I want the windows from that window company, I will assist with filling and sanding, have the living room parquet flooring installed, and we will do the laminate flooring in the children’s room ourselves."
There are GCs that are flexible enough to offset the usual disadvantages.
As for whether a profit of 60,000 euros remains per house, I consider that to be just a myth.
haydee schrieb:
We are currently building with a general contractor (GC) and so far we would choose to work with them again.
- custom planning
- high transparency (there is no detailed description of construction services; instead, from the beginning there is a calculation that makes it easy to add or remove options)
- all tradespeople come from the local area
- scopes of work can be removed and replaced with personal labor.
A few towns away, someone had the shell construction done through the GC, uses all materials from the GC, and receives professional support if there are any problems.
An acquaintance built with a very small GC, and she was able to specify, for example, "I want the windows from that window manufacturer," helped with filling and sanding, had parquet flooring installed in the living room, and did the laminate flooring in the children's room herself.
There are GCs that are flexible enough to balance out the usual disadvantages.
As for whether a €60,000 profit remains per house, I think that’s a myth.Depending on how extensive the markup on the selections is, I can imagine it. Personally, I assume a profit for the GC of at least €20,000 (after deducting all expenses). They don’t work for free, and certainly not for you. They aim to maximize the amount that remains in the end.
We built with a general contractor (GC) again and are very satisfied this time as well. In the purchase agreement, we had many extras already priced, so there were no unexpected additional costs. The tradespeople hired by the GC have been working with this construction company for many years, everything runs smoothly, and there are no waiting times. We planned our floor plan completely on our own, and we were also free to choose the heating system, ventilation, and so on. Additional charges for electrical work, for example, we settle directly with the electrician. I know a family building with an architect who hardly receives any offers because the tradespeople seem to be very busy at the moment.
Best regards,
Sabine
Best regards,
Sabine
We also built with a general contractor (GC) offering a fixed price guarantee. However, the company’s leaders are two architects, so custom design was ensured. We chose a standard house model as the shell and modified the floor plan and windows. There were no unexpected costs regarding the price.
Before signing the construction contract, we asked about all additional costs, which were then included in the contract.
The fixtures themselves (windows, doors, tile prices, sanitary installations, etc.) were appealing and modern.
The contractors were all locally based and had frequently worked with the GC before. Our site manager was very thorough.
Perhaps communication could have been better, or maybe we would have done some things differently with the architect—or maybe not.
Overall, we felt well supported since the GC ultimately coordinated and planned everything.
Before signing the construction contract, we asked about all additional costs, which were then included in the contract.
The fixtures themselves (windows, doors, tile prices, sanitary installations, etc.) were appealing and modern.
The contractors were all locally based and had frequently worked with the GC before. Our site manager was very thorough.
Perhaps communication could have been better, or maybe we would have done some things differently with the architect—or maybe not.
Overall, we felt well supported since the GC ultimately coordinated and planned everything.
D
Deliverer17 Oct 2017 10:10We worked with an independent architect for our build.
At the start, they provided a maximum cost estimate, which was ultimately met (even slightly undercut). We trusted this estimate because we were able to speak with several of their former clients, and it had worked out well for all of them.
In our case, the architect handled the entire planning process, including all interactions with authorities, obtaining bids, and construction supervision. We opted for a turnkey build, with our own contribution limited to the garden. Thanks to many years of collaboration and well-planned scheduling, the architect has a large portfolio of reliable contractors who provided very competitive offers. Any additional suggestions we brought in were nowhere near as cost-effective.
Since the architect only recommended contractors who were proven to be reliable, they were able to guarantee—and in our case meet—a construction period of five months (plus time for defect correction). However, we signed contracts directly with the contractors. Compared to general contractors or design-build firms, this approach means that if one company goes bankrupt, only a small portion of the funds are at risk, and switching contractors remains relatively flexible.
The architect’s fee was negotiated at the start as 10% of the total construction cost estimate and paid in five installments.
Weekly on-site meetings (the architect was present about every other day) and quick email response times (from a few minutes up to one day) helped maintain a good working relationship.
Oh, and it was by far the most affordable option among all those we considered (including large companies like Massa Haus/Schwörerhaus as well as smaller regional general contractors and prefab home builders).
We would choose this approach again.
At the start, they provided a maximum cost estimate, which was ultimately met (even slightly undercut). We trusted this estimate because we were able to speak with several of their former clients, and it had worked out well for all of them.
In our case, the architect handled the entire planning process, including all interactions with authorities, obtaining bids, and construction supervision. We opted for a turnkey build, with our own contribution limited to the garden. Thanks to many years of collaboration and well-planned scheduling, the architect has a large portfolio of reliable contractors who provided very competitive offers. Any additional suggestions we brought in were nowhere near as cost-effective.
Since the architect only recommended contractors who were proven to be reliable, they were able to guarantee—and in our case meet—a construction period of five months (plus time for defect correction). However, we signed contracts directly with the contractors. Compared to general contractors or design-build firms, this approach means that if one company goes bankrupt, only a small portion of the funds are at risk, and switching contractors remains relatively flexible.
The architect’s fee was negotiated at the start as 10% of the total construction cost estimate and paid in five installments.
Weekly on-site meetings (the architect was present about every other day) and quick email response times (from a few minutes up to one day) helped maintain a good working relationship.
Oh, and it was by far the most affordable option among all those we considered (including large companies like Massa Haus/Schwörerhaus as well as smaller regional general contractors and prefab home builders).
We would choose this approach again.
Zaba12 schrieb:
Depending on how extensive the markup for the sample selection is, I can imagine that. Personally, I expect the general contractor to make a profit of at least 20,000 euros after deducting all expenses. They don’t do the work for free, especially not for you. They aim to have as much as possible left over in the end.I understand they don’t have a red cross on a white background, and I never claimed that. General contractors are contract partners and therefore clearly the counterpart.
A profit of 20,000 versus 60,000 euros is already a huge difference. I assume a 10% pre-tax profit, but not a flat 60,000 euros per house. It should be obvious to everyone that somewhere between a 20 and 30% markup is necessary.
You simply have to find the general contractor, architect, or developer that suits you and offers you the most value for your money. There are definitely differences, especially among general contractors.
Similar topics