Architects or prefab house cost calculation and next steps

The usual dilemma with architects... WITH them it doesn't work because they don't really pull through and simply due to all the engineer fees the construction becomes expensive (yes I know I know 11ant - the good architect saves his fee through his incredible genius by designing the construction cheaply again - I haven't met one like that yet) and costs are a black box ("I calculated medium standard once" - totally irrelevant what idea you have about heating, technology etc.) - WITHOUT them it also doesn't work if you don't want the absolute standard cost from the I-don't-care draftsman... I have been through it and can sing a song about it, my way after a long search that works but maybe isn’t ideal: architect service phases 1-4 (today I would rather go up to service phase 3). Constantly putting the brake on the square meters even if it’s said it's just a bit more masonry... With the plans to the regional general contractor with turnkey fixed price thing. You can find some with realistic prices, significantly below the architect’s estimate.. And there the price is made based on your equipment wishes - if you want it fancy expensive, standard cheap. Quite simple. GD

By mistake do you mean that he proposed something so individual at all? If yes, it was simply that we presented him our desired room concept, what we find nice and what not, etc. But for example, we never talked about the house or roof shape. He had offered on his own initiative to first work out a proposal. Basically, we also liked the approach.

That sounds okay so far. Did you discuss the approach in detail – cf. "A house building roadmap, also for you: the HOAI phase model!" – and did you know at every point of the planning discussions which phase you were currently in?

We had already cautiously inquired whether a certain shape would have (cost) advantages. The answer was that it wouldn’t be that dramatic, since for example the wall volume wouldn’t differ significantly. If that really is the case and the costs with the "standard variant" with an architect are similar (high), then I do wonder where the cost difference to the general contractor comes from?

Yes, certain shapes have cost advantages (which is why the general contractors love the Anstattvillen so much) or other shapes (especially the hipped roof over polygonal floor plans like with the T-bungalow) have their cost disadvantages. Of course, not everyone necessarily has to find a single-pitch hip roof beautiful for that reason, and every aspect has its limits in how much subjectivity can be packed in.

Somehow I must be too dumb. All I find is that it can also be inexpensive with an architect. Or what do you mean by that? We would love to work with an architect. It’s also not about the last euro. But the above-mentioned difference is still too much. Or are we overlooking something here? Where do I find the mistake in our approach?

Yes, the above-mentioned difference is considerably too much, hence my suspicion of a mistake in the approach – but from the above description I have not identified it yet. When googling without the exact phrase in quotation marks, more popular hits come up first despite content vagueness; I mean one whose meta teaser begins with "As far as we talk about costliness due to fees, there is a grain of truth in that."

I’ve been through this and can sing a song about it, my way after long searching which works but might not be ideal: architect service phases 1-4 (I would today rather go to service phase 3). Constantly stepping on the square meter brake even if it’s said that it’s only a little more masonry... With the plans to the regional general contractor with turnkey fixed price thing.

So you already consider service phase 4 with the architect unnecessary, and would want to go to the general contractor already with the "plans" of service phase 3? – actually, with the general contractor, due to lump sum calculation, every square meter costs, even if it’s only a bit more masonry (precisely here the architect is worthwhile again – but only if you also tender with him, otherwise not or even vice versa). I recently already “asked” you politely to once show your current draft ;-)

That sounds okay so far. Have you discussed the procedure in detail – cf. "A house building roadmap, also for you: the phase model of the HOAI!" – and did you know at each point of the planning discussions in which phase you currently were?

Not really. But so far, these have all been non-binding preliminary talks.

Yes, the above-mentioned difference is considerably too high, hence my suspicion regarding an error in the procedure – however, from the description above I have not yet identified it. When googling without the exact phrase in quotation marks, more popular hits appear first despite content vagueness; I mean one whose meta teaser begins with "As far as we talk about costliness due to the fee amount, there is a kernel of truth to the saying."

I am still clueless. But I will use the search engine again. Regarding the difference, I had suspected that it is especially the architect's fee, as both architects had sunk this in a lump sum ancillary construction costs position (e.g., service phases 1 to 8, surveyor, heating and sanitary planning, soil report), i.e. 20-25% of the construction costs. Roughly speaking, in the architect's calculation, the pure construction costs are somewhat in the range of the construction plus ancillary construction costs of the prefab house builder.

I had already "asked" you subtly recently to show your current draft ;-)

That was directed at Gerddieter, right? I will also post our draft once it is a bit further along.

Not really. But so far, all have been non-binding preliminary discussions.

Then "he offered on his own accord to work out proposals" means an oral contract offer at least up to and including service phase 2 (preliminary design).

That was addressed to Gerddieter, right? I will also post our draft once it is a bit further along.

Yes, it was. He recently wrote something that gave reason to assume he has at least made this significant step further.