Architect and general contractor in combination?

Hello,

does anyone have experience with house construction in this combination:
an independent architect who plans the house and submits the applications, and then
instead of awarding the contracts for the trades individually, having the house built by a general contractor and only paying the architect hourly as a construction supervisor?

What do you think? Has anyone ever chosen this mixed approach and if so, what experiences and thoughts do you have about it? What do you think about the costs?

Thanks & regards

Brief counter-questions:

Who is responsible for the execution planning?

Who is supposed to act as site manager within the meaning of the state building regulations? What exactly should he inspect "by the hour"? How many hours are you thinking of in this regard?

Of course, this hybrid form is viable if the architect agrees to it and assumes at least the service owed according to public building law...

Here is an excerpt from the model building code. Corresponding formulations can be found in every state building regulation.


§ 52 Basic Duties
In the construction, alteration, change of use, and removal of facilities, the builder and, within their sphere of influence, the other parties involved in the construction are responsible for ensuring that the public-law regulations are complied with.

§ 53 Builder
(1) 1The builder must appoint suitable parties for the preparation, supervision, and execution of a construction project that is not exempt from procedures as well as for the removal of facilities in accordance with §§ 54 to 56, unless he is himself suitable to fulfill the obligations under these regulations.
2The builder is also responsible for the applications, notifications, and evidence required under the public-law regulations.
3Before starting construction, he must notify the building supervisory authority in writing of the name of the site manager and, during construction, immediately report any change of this person. ...

§ 56 Site Manager
(1) 1The site manager must ensure that the construction measure is carried out in accordance with the public-law requirements and issue the necessary instructions for this purpose.
2Within the scope of this task, he must ensure the safe structural operation of the construction site, in particular the hazard-free interaction of the contractors' work.
3The responsibility of the contractors remains unaffected.
(2) 1The site manager must have the expertise and experience required for his task.
2If he does not have the necessary expertise in certain areas, suitable specialist site managers must be involved.
3These then replace the site manager to that extent.
4The site manager must coordinate the activities of the specialist site managers and his own activities.

Thank you for the information - the site management would be taken over by the general contractor and the architect basically only checks like an expert...

But do you think this makes sense or should we just work with the architect and have individual trade contracts?

Thanks & best regards

In general, I prefer the separate awarding of all construction services ... However, if you want to build with a general contractor (for whatever reasons), an additional expert (e.g., an architect) is definitely strongly recommended!

Would it be possible to list the advantages and disadvantages of the two construction types (general contractor and architect) once again for the layman - (although I have already read a lot about it, such a compact overview would have its merits and I think it always interests novice builders... On the other hand, I also understand that a general comparison is difficult because it always depends on the individual case. But it would still be nice...

Thanks & regards
Ramade

Well, then let's try to specify the basic problem a bit ...

Should it be a solid house?