ᐅ Ending Collaboration with an Architect after Design Development (Stage 4) – What Next?
Created on: 7 Jun 2020 13:16
L
laumar01
Hello, we planned our solid single-family house together with an architect (LF1- LF4). Unfortunately, we were not satisfied with the collaboration overall, so we decided to part ways after the successful building permit / planning permission application. Since we consider ourselves building novices, a separate tendering process for the trades with our own construction management is not an option for us, and we are leaning towards turnkey construction with a general contractor.
The building permit / planning permission is currently being processed by the building authority. Now we are quite unsure how to proceed with the next steps and how the cooperation with a general contractor will work if they are executing a house that they did not design themselves.
Does anyone have any tips for us?
What should we pay attention to, and which pitfalls should we avoid?
Has anyone had similar experiences and made a change after LF4?
Thank you in advance for your help!
The building permit / planning permission is currently being processed by the building authority. Now we are quite unsure how to proceed with the next steps and how the cooperation with a general contractor will work if they are executing a house that they did not design themselves.
Does anyone have any tips for us?
What should we pay attention to, and which pitfalls should we avoid?
Has anyone had similar experiences and made a change after LF4?
Thank you in advance for your help!
In general, it should not be a problem to find a general contractor (GC) who will handle the initial design submission. Of course, the detailed design still needs to be developed somewhere, but that is a solvable issue. You could also hire another architect for the further implementation (detailed design, tendering, construction management).
PS: As far as I know, "phase" is still spelled with a 'P' – or am I out of date on that?
PS: As far as I know, "phase" is still spelled with a 'P' – or am I out of date on that?
Thank you for your responses!
Service phase is of course spelled with "Ph." Embarrassing! oops:
Yes, the design quality is definitely better and was our main reason for working with an independent architect. Unfortunately, it became clear during the project that the architect’s strength lies only in design, not in project management. Continuing to work with them would be like "running headfirst into disaster." We understand it’s much better if detailed planning and design come from a single source. That’s why we started this thread. Hopefully, with your advice, we can minimize the drawbacks.
I agree with you. The execution planner and construction manager should definitely be the same person. That’s why we are now considering a GC—to have everything from one source. If I understand your post correctly, you’re rather skeptical about that with a GC. What would you advise us then? To hire an independent construction manager who handles execution planning, tendering, site supervision including coordination and final inspection with us?
We had also considered that. But we fear that an architect might find it even harder than a GC to work with the plans of another architect.
"Phase" is still spelled with a 'P' as far as I know – or am I out of date?
Service phase is of course spelled with "Ph." Embarrassing! oops:
By hiring an independent architect instead of a general contractor (GC), you only gained design quality (or maybe not even that)?
Yes, the design quality is definitely better and was our main reason for working with an independent architect. Unfortunately, it became clear during the project that the architect’s strength lies only in design, not in project management. Continuing to work with them would be like "running headfirst into disaster." We understand it’s much better if detailed planning and design come from a single source. That’s why we started this thread. Hopefully, with your advice, we can minimize the drawbacks.
All the more reason the execution planner should at least also be the construction manager. GC construction managers unfortunately have different responsibilities and goals: not to ensure design-compliant execution, but to avoid conflicts between the trades involved (basically more about process facilitation than quality control, the latter only as far as necessary to prevent claims)
I agree with you. The execution planner and construction manager should definitely be the same person. That’s why we are now considering a GC—to have everything from one source. If I understand your post correctly, you’re rather skeptical about that with a GC. What would you advise us then? To hire an independent construction manager who handles execution planning, tendering, site supervision including coordination and final inspection with us?
You could of course also look for a different architect for the further stages (detailed planning, tendering, construction management).
We had also considered that. But we fear that an architect might find it even harder than a GC to work with the plans of another architect.
How about hiring a civil engineer to take over the construction and project management? They can assist you with the tendering process or help with the selection and negotiations with a general contractor.
Since you save on the architect’s fee for further execution, there should be some available budget for this.
Since you save on the architect’s fee for further execution, there should be some available budget for this.
How about finding a structural engineer to take on the construction and project management?
They could assist you either with the tender process or with selecting and negotiating with a general contractor.
Since you would save the architect’s fee for further execution, there should be some available budget here. We were already considering hiring a construction supervisor to help us with inspections.
Could that be avoided if the structural engineer takes on this role?
Yes, the costs for construction management by the architect (work phase 8?) could then be allocated elsewhere. If we were building solely with a general contractor, that would probably be included in their fees.
If we hire a structural engineer, we would pay them directly, and the general contractor would not be allowed to charge for this service, right?
Would a general contractor even cooperate with an external construction manager, or are they usually more interested in handling everything internally?
That would argue in favor of linking a structural engineer with individual trades instead, wouldn’t it?
How do the costs generally compare between a general contractor plus an external construction supervisor for inspections versus a structural engineer combined with individual trades?
Similar topics