Construction method: Prefabricated house Solid house Construction supervisor Architectural planning

IV. Architect / Construction Supervisor

My wife and I are not fans of exaggerated promises, and boastful but unbelievable price quotes rather make us suspicious. In any case, you wouldn’t be able to pressure us into a contract with such things. I would (by the way, I am also a lawyer) thoroughly review the contract with colleagues.

These are the best conditions!

a) Architect contract: If I understood correctly, then I have to (which is usually the case with contracts) precisely define the subject matter of the order. The fee is then calculated based on a "table." The classification here may include special features regarding complexity and difficulty. These would be the points that might be negotiable.

The contract is not negotiable, because neither is the HOAI. There are so-called service phases (search Tante Gurgel for the full HOAI text or dejure, or also the Architects’ Chamber responsible for Lower Saxony), based on which you agree on the corresponding phases with the architect you trust.

I’m a bit concerned about this black box that prices essentially have to be obtained first. Here, of course, you don’t know exactly whether everything fits as you imagine. You have to rely completely on the architect’s experience and efforts; otherwise, the budget will quickly be exceeded.

That’s true; since you are a lawyer, you have surely already found relevant court rulings on this issue and are probably disillusioned.

You are largely on the safe side if you assume €1500.00 per sqm plus €35,000–40,000 ancillary construction costs, plus €10,000 reserve for extras, plus €20,000 for painting and flooring work in EL, plus €10,000 for outdoor facilities (there won’t be much more than a little gravel and turf on your property), as well as the cost of a prefabricated garage. Don’t be tempted if the architect comes up with a smaller sum; if he is right in the end, maybe the garden landscaper is still calculable. If not, you have considered the total amount and won’t face unpleasant talks with the financer.

On the other hand, construction supervisors as general contractors will have a certain price risk, since they negotiate a fixed price with us and on the other hand may also have a certain risk of price increases. They will pass this on to the prices they negotiate with us in advance. Anything else would be somehow unwise, and I think they aren’t like that here.

Unlikely, because they negotiate their terms with the suppliers every year-end for the coming year; the risk is always manageable.

b) Construction supervision contract

Basically, we would do a sample selection and name all components individually in the construction/service description and then see if the price still holds.

Here speaks the lawyer.

After you have gone through this twice, it should be sufficiently clear that a construction project under a construction supervisor cannot be described down to the last detail. It should really be enough to say "German brand product" and the note "built according to the valid technical ..." especially if the gut agrees with the brain; i.e., the chemistry is right. Otherwise, I actually recommend awarding the individual trades via architect.

In addition, they will have to tolerate that I supervise the construction with an expert.

Serious providers have no problem with this; on the contrary, they welcome it because four eyes see more than two.

Some malicious tongues claim that they somehow share in profits via commissions or bonuses in the context of the re-calculation, while, of course, being on the companies’ payroll at the same time.

Sorry, that is pub talk; even the cheapest builders cannot afford that. Usually, DEKRA or TÜV are involved as inspection bodies; it goes without saying that these are commercial enterprises with a reputation to lose. The days when you put a crate of beer in the trunk for a TÜV inspector in the hope of the coveted sticker are long gone.

CONCLUSION:

We will now approach the matter concretely next week and then have a cost idea that is already somewhat more detailed. Then to the bank, because they absolutely need some kind of calculation basis, which will then provide a buffer upwards. Conditions are currently really tasty.

From my point of view, exactly the other way around. FIRST talk to the bank / independent financing broker and then awaken desires (within your financial possibilities).

Rhine regards

can you describe that a bit more precisely? We are in the final stages of our planning and still have a conventional house builder (monolithic wall construction) and one of the "good" prefabricated house manufacturers to choose from. For both construction methods, we find many advantages and disadvantages, so we want to decide in favor of the more creative design. Nonetheless, we are also very interested in experience reports about prefabricated houses that have been standing for a while - in our area, we haven't seen many yet, and all our friends have built solid houses.

Within this context, we have already looked at quite a few prefabricated houses and I would definitely stay away from a prefab house now - if I weren’t already a convinced fan of solid houses; whether 20, 10 years, or younger. It is sometimes quite creepy how such a house looks after a few years.

Hello,

can you describe that a bit more precisely? We are in the final stages of our planning and still have a conventional house builder (monolithic wall construction) and one of the "good" prefab manufacturers to choose from. For both construction methods, we find many advantages and disadvantages, so we want to decide in favor of the more creative design.

That is an interesting approach

Nevertheless, we are also very interested in experience reports about prefab houses that have been standing for a while – in our area we haven't seen many of those yet and in our circle of friends everyone has built solidly.

Maybe it’s because I am professionally involved with the construction of solid single-family houses ...

The last prefab house we looked at during our search already looked about 10 years older from the outside than it actually was; inside it was not much better. For example, in this house, the rafters in the attic were kept visible (wood naturally works throughout its lifetime, you have to like that) and cracks followed one after another. Also – not uncommon in prefab houses – a large proportion of windows were installed as skylights and gable triangle windows, unfortunately, the connection points to the outer shell were mostly decayed; moisture penetrated. The same applied to the basement – we were told that the moisture would have resulted in 55-60 digits; so normal for a utility basement from the year 89. In fact, we would have had to dry out the entire basement, since the black mold had been roughly painted over; our expert didn’t find that very amusing.

However, you have to consider that we have looked at houses from 10 to a maximum of 25 years old and – for the solid house sector, this is still the case; generally, prefab houses are assumed to have a calculated lifespan of 60 years, solid single-family houses of 80 years. The prefab house industry has made immense progress in the last 10 years and this is also reflected in their newest houses; therefore, they probably won’t look so worn down in 10 years from today.

Rhenish greetings

Hello,

as a former fan of solid houses who, however, has turned 180° in the last two years and is now also building a prefabricated house, I would like to add my two cents here.

It is true, many older prefabricated houses look a bit "finished" today.

Basically, I think you should also go through the world with open eyes here – a house in the "from EUR 99,999 above the top edge of the slab" class simply cannot be as good due to the materials used as a higher quality and thus more expensive building (completely regardless of whether it is built solidly or as a prefabricated house).

How many prefabricated houses are not even recognized as such from the outside is the next point that should not be overlooked. The days when you could recognize all prefabricated houses by the "hidden" (silicone) joints behind the downspouts of the gutter are definitely over for many manufacturers.

One should also not forget the respective maintenance of the house – in our residential area (construction of the first houses began in 1998), there are some houses I would not want to move into. Dirty, neglected, simply shabby – some of them are solid houses, the others are prefabricated...

It always depends on how you treat your property.

I can neither confirm nor deny the somewhat shorter lifespan of prefabricated houses, but I have no problem if one of my grandchildren eventually tears down our house and builds a new one with modern technology and equipment, just as we are doing now.

In my opinion, "building for eternity" is no longer up-to-date anyway...

Best regards,

Dirk

The same thoughts occupied us as well, very much so. Now the decision stands at least once that it will NOT be a prefabricated house. However, this has absolutely nothing to do with us distrusting the quality of reputable providers, but for reasons already clearly explained by you forum participants. These are:

1. Lower resale value. Even if this is fueled by subjective circumstances, in the end it does not matter why one does not get a reasonable return, only that it is so. Here in the north, it is simply the case that most houses are built as solid houses and this is also expected here.

2. The price of a prefabricated house here really does not differ from that of a solid house construction. The advantage that exists in the south therefore cannot fully come into play here. Schwörerhaus is even considerably more expensive (and admits it openly). One of the reasons why only relatively few prefabricated houses are built here and if so, only those that apparently do not seem to play in the "upper quality league."

Finally, one piece of news. It will now be a bungalow after all.

Hello Dirk,

I do not want to disparage an FH to you or any other user. If it came across that way, I am sorry!

Basically, I think one should also go through the world with open eyes here - a house of the "From above ground level only EUR 99,999" class simply cannot be as good due to the materials used as a higher quality and thus also higher-priced building (regardless of whether it is built solidly or as a prefab house).

I fully agree with that. Only - the property we looked at is by no means from the cheap category.

The rest of your post I agree with again.

Rhenish regards