Danwood complete offer vs. separate commissioning architect

why can you already have an offer for the house when the architect still needs to be commissioned for the planning?

That's how it usually works in most cases, right? You get a preliminary plan (adjusted floor plan, description of construction services, possibly additional features with estimated price) with a price from the sales department. A real architect - whether commissioned separately or not - in my understanding often only comes into play after the contract is signed for further planning. Whether the window is installed on the left or right later does not (significantly) affect the price. However, if it later turns out during planning with the architect that a waterproof concrete shell is necessary, this results in an additional cost. It is primarily up to the client (and ideally the sales department) to clarify as many of these points as possible in advance or to include a buffer.

I am also regularly surprised that this regularly causes astonishment. When we make an offer, we do not do the detailed planning in the offer. Because the offer is free of charge and non-binding, of course we only put in the work necessary to be able to give a price and check the feasibility of what we offer. But no more effort than necessary.

Basically, it is always better to have one contact or contractual partner and not 3 or 4, who, in case of doubt, shift the blame back and forth, miss deadlines, etc. It is also a question of responsibility. If your basement builder does not deliver, for whatever reason, then that is your problem and the house builder can hold you liable if the installation date fails. If everything comes from one source, it is the house builder’s problem, the construction time guarantee applies. But since the one contact person assumes these clarifications and the risk, it is naturally more expensive than if the builder wears himself out with it.

And in house construction, as a rule, there is already more than enough to clarify oneself, even with one contractor.

The basement is to be partly used for residential purposes, i.e. the house entrance area and the study for the home office will be located in the basement.

Can you name a few points here? My understanding would be that the basement builder provides the basement based on plans from Danwood or the architect. These specifications should then also become part of the contract. My idea is, as soon as the planning is sufficiently advanced, to tender the basement including earthworks and award the contract to the best bidder. Ideally, this would be Glatthaar, due to the close coordination between Glatthaar and Danwood that you mentioned.

You really have to check what Danwood wants to take on regarding the finishing, what they can, and what they have even offered, since with basements they usually assume a classic utility basement.

For example, they (even with a theoretical order with Glatthaar) would not have taken on insulation and plastering of the non-earth-contact walls & ceilings on the outside in our basement area, no installation of classic windows (i.e. only windows that can be installed in the concrete factory - Aco products, and without shutters or any kind of shading), no drywall for additional interior walls, no bathrooms or toilets, no filling, wallpapering or other wall work, no floor coverings, etc. – all of these are services that probably have to be subcontracted for a residential basement.

Maybe the rules have changed since then, but you definitely have to make sure that Danwood (and of course also Fingerhaus) have explicitly offered everything. Pester the sales department that they also very explicitly confirm this in writing to avoid any nasty surprises later. Everything that is not explicitly included in the offer from Danwood (and Glatthaar) will not be done.

In our case – since we did not build with Glatthaar – in addition, floor insulation, underfloor heating and screed, all electrical installations, wastewater pipes between ceiling top and main sewer line were our responsibility. Danwood only took on the ventilation installation. Of course, that means a lot of trades are added if you are not building with Danwood + Glatthaar.

If you mean things like site setup, meter cabinet, soil survey etc., I have those on my radar :)

Exactly, that’s what I meant. Also think about construction management: if you are in a federal state where a general site manager is required, note that the Glatthaar & Danwood site managers are not authorized for this, and not every Danwood/sales architect also does construction management. This can result in unpleasant additional costs.

Thanks for the tip about the independent architect. It is indeed my plan to have the planning checked by an architect/construction expert before signing the contract to avoid planning errors.

As I said, I would approach it differently and have the floor plan developed in draft form by an independent architect. Based on, if you like, example standard floor plans from the favored homebuilding companies, but always unbiased, to get the best out of the slope, the plot, sight lines, and your needs – that is really worth its weight in gold.

If you are 100% sure, however, that the standard or, from my point of view, adjusted floor plans of the prefabricated house company meet your needs, then you can do it the other way around. But in my opinion you can save yourself the independent architect or construction expert. You can post the floor plans here in the forum, you will get plenty of suggestions and criticism – bring a thick skin.

You really have to check what wants to take on, can take on, and has even offered in terms of the interior finishing, since with basements they usually assume a classic utility basement.

We seem to be lucky with our Danwood sales team. We have the following items in the offer:

[*]Screed in the basement including underfloor heating [*]Roller shutters [*]Ventilation [*]Electrical installation [*]Same staircase system in the basement as on the ground floor/attic [*]Wastewater pipe in the basement vertically/ connection basement floor slab – basement ceiling 5x

In the offer from Glatthaar the following as well:

[*]Perimeter insulation on the exterior wall thickness = 140 mm [*]Load-bearing perimeter insulation under the basement floor slab thickness = 100 mm

A further interior finishing, for example, plastering work, wall and floor coverings, they want to offer us optionally in the next version of the offer.

if you are in a federal state where a general construction manager is required

I am in Baden-Württemberg. We have found here in the forum about this. There it is sometimes strongly advised against commissioning the house and basement separately...

It seems we are lucky with our Danwood sales. We have the following items in the offer:

[*]Screed in the basement including underfloor heating [*]Roller shutters [*]Ventilation [*]Electrical installation [*]Same staircase system in the basement as on the ground and top floors [*]Wastewater pipe in the basement vertical/ connection basement floor slab – basement ceiling 5x

In the offer from Glatthaar the following additionally:

[*]Perimeter insulation on the exterior wall D=140 mm [*]Load-bearing perimeter insulation under the basement floor slab D=100 mm

A further interior finishing, for example putty work, wall and floor coverings, they want to optionally include with us in the next offer version.

Well, it doesn’t seem to be that different to me – for example, perimeter insulation means the earth-contact insulation, that is everything that is buried in the ground. I would preferably ask: What about the areas that are open (e.g., around the house entrance) – who insulates and plaster them? Oh, by the way: Roller shutters – are they front-mounted roller shutters? If yes, do you want them that way? If not or undefined, definitely clarify – I don’t want to bet my last penny, but I vaguely remember that front-mounted roller shutters were possible. But of course, that is not necessarily the expectation in a new building... Regarding the construction manager: best to confront sales and ask whether the introduced architect takes this over, and whether this service is part of the price.

Since the plot has a moderate slope, we will build with a basement. After extensive research and comparison, two offers crystallized as follows:

[*
Customized catalog prefab house from Danwood
[LIST]
[*]Exterior dimensions 10.57x8.92=94.3
[*]Architect services (fixed price, approx. €8,000) and basement construction to be contracted separately (i.e. at least three contracts)
[*]Danwood recommends partner basement builder Glatthaar and also architects known to them


[*]Customized catalog prefab house from Fingerhaus


[*]Exterior dimensions 9.75x8.35=81.4
[*]Architect services and basement are included in the offer, i.e. only one contract

What exactly is a "moderate slope": Living basement (residential lower floor) on the valley side from normal parapet height without light wells above ground or even floor-to-ceiling above ground?
75 or 65 sqm living area in the base footprint are by no means equally sized houses. In this respect, the comparison is flawed.

Now the first offer, despite the larger house size, is about €25,000 cheaper. Since Danwood produces in Poland and Fingerhaus in Germany, this might explain the price difference.

That is nonsense. If the "smaller" house really suffices for you, I see no reason for a larger one. The myth "Poland = discount" is not really a suitable explanation substitute.

The basement is to be used partly for residential purposes, i.e., the house entrance area and the home office will be located in the basement.

Aha, so we are talking about valley-side access. Do you still enjoy the valley view from the living room in the catalog ground floor, or is it supposed to open to an ascending garden?

Our concern is that as builders we will be ground down in this constellation or sometimes have to play site manager without professional expertise.

Since this is probably one of the most justified worries of all time, the idea reads:

as soon as the planning is sufficiently advanced, to tender the basement including earthworks and award the contract to the best bidder. Ideally, that would be Glatthaar,

to me like an absolute kamikaze contradiction, because

My understanding would be that the basement builder, based on plans from Danwood or the architect, constructs the basement. These specifications should then also become contract components.

To become part of the contract, the "basement" must mandatorily be included in the scope of performance of the contract. There is nothing to tender in this respect, as awarding the contract to the basement builder of the house manufacturer is, as Mrs. Former Chancellor would say, "without alternative" in the ideal case here.

It is also a question of responsibility. If your basement builder does not deliver, for whatever reason, then that is your problem and the house builder can hold you responsible if the assembly date fails.
If everything comes from one source, then it is the house builder's problem, the construction time guarantee applies.
But since the one contact person takes on these clarifications and the risk, that is naturally more expensive than if the builder has to struggle with this themselves.

I have deleted a crucial little word in the quote. With every division into separate contracts, a devil’s triangle would arise to the detriment of the builder:

OKKD is a tolerance-critical interface that should preferably be "kept in one hand," at least regarding overall responsibility [...]. By splitting the building contract into two separate parts, you open the flank for both parties to slip away in case of problems and to blame the other (or at least the responsibility) to each other.

The slab/basement manufacturer measures the height from the left manhole cover as a reference point (unfortunately from the “other left”), or the basement ceiling has openings planned with coordinates x/y in "meters after Christ" but executed in "meters plus VAT," and so on. Therefore, an indispensable personal union of the potential culprit and responsible party is required here.

Thus, the provider without basement integration in the contract scope would already categorically be out of the game anyway.

However, I fully agree with the more far-reaching suggestion

As I said, I would approach it differently and have the floor plan developed independently by an architect in draft form. For me, gladly based on example standard floor plans from the favored house builders, but always unbiased, to get the best out of the slope, plot, sight lines, and your needs – that's really worth its weight in gold.

– not only theoretically but gladly also practically (see external "Setting the course: Steering toward implementation"). A catalog house can only be used very conditionally here in principle. You can lose a lot of money on the generally recommended choice of a catalog design if you do not satisfactorily consider the slope location. Therefore, the basic model should be chosen "too small" so that including the extra basement imposed by the property does not lead to an unnecessarily oversized demand for living space. The OP should first show the plot (don't forget to fill in Yvonne’s famous #questionnaire!), only then can substantive advice be given here. Then a freelance architect should do "Module A" (see "A house-building roadmap, also for you: the phase model of the HOAI"), with the result of which one can proceed to the setting-the-course phase during the resting period. Depending on the outcome, one then returns to the architect for either just performance phase 3 or the full "Module B," and later possibly to a provider found during the setting-the-course phase.

That the OP then happily ends up with a wooden house builder, I do not want to exclude but is unlikely in a slope situation, as (except for the shrub carpenter) almost no wooden builders also build earth-contact houses. Then a hybrid construction would probably result.

For the readers, I will quickly address the question from the headline:
Secondly, here it is not the architect contract but the basement that makes the offer "complete."
And firstly, the inclusive architect of a general contractor/house builder is always one who (in this contract form) only carries out the "necessary" architectural services – i.e., exclusively those that have to do with submission rights (and those are a completely different matter than the aspects of implementing the client’s wishes, also from a completely different perspective).