Is it sensible to combine a freelance architect with a general contractor?

Hello. I registered spontaneously in this forum and hope for your tips and experiences. We have found and meanwhile purchased a great building plot. According to the development plan, however, we would only have been allowed to build a plain gable roof single-family house with single-storey construction. Because we do not want that, we sought advice from a local architect. With success. The development plan now allows us a flat roof. Since the upper floor is proportionally smaller by a certain factor, the current house design is considered single-storey despite two full stories without a sloping roof. For us a wonderful solution. The visit to the architect was absolutely worthwhile. Now I am slowly coming to my question: We have a perfect design planning from our architect.... we now want to combine the previous work of our architect with the service of a general contractor in turnkey construction. The reason for this is, on the one hand, personal good contacts that certainly bring a price advantage. On the other hand, we would also prefer not to tender each trade separately... topic warranty, coordination, communication. Our current idea: our architect makes an execution plan from which the general contractor can then start working. The architect would, billed hourly, occasionally visit the construction site and check the execution. The general contractor builds turnkey according to the execution plan of the architect. - the general contractor must make his own execution plan for the calculation... can we save ourselves the architect’s execution plan or is it better to pay twice to ensure that the ideas that shape the house are also implemented... even if annoying??? - our planned house is not a run-of-the-mill standard house... the general contractor may lack experience to create a good execution plan from a design plan??? - currently there is a construction boom... the margin of the general contractor = costs architect for tendering trades including construction management??? Certainly an architect costs money, but I cannot read execution planning drawings and check whether all details have been understood by the general contractor when presented with a design drawing. Does anyone have experience with this combination: freelance architect + general contractor What do you consider the most sensible approach at this point? I look forward to your answers and experiences.

As always: it depends,... Many general contractors have their own architects whom they want to keep busy. They would lose margin and have employees without work. Other general contractors do not have any architects at all and always follow your approach. I would not see the execution planning with the architect but with the general contractor; the architect can then check it on an hourly basis. Both have advantages and disadvantages. Advantage of one company: short distances, the same language; architect knows what his people can do Advantage of a two-part division: you immediately have an independent construction supervisor, new ideas, "a second perspective" on the project

The only reasonable way: a meeting between you and the two of them. Agreement, handshake. That's how it's done. It certainly works. Karsten

-our planned house is not a run-of-the-mill standard house ...the general contractor may possibly lack the experience to create a good execution plan from a design plan???

Execution plans are regularly created by the design planner (and only in this way does it make sense). Switching horses in between would be, in my opinion, a crazy idea. It is also by no means unusual for an independent architect to build with a GC – although they usually have their own people they know. And it is also not unusual for an architect to do almost everything with a particular GC, but always combine that with a particular carpenter or something similar.

The GC will have their own construction service specification according to which they build as standard – especially if they are also acting as a developer in parallel. For a "non run-of-the-mill" house, the architect must then compare this standard construction service specification with the one he envisions for your project. And then switch to a different contractor everywhere where the differences suggest it.

GC does not necessarily mean "all or nothing" – on the contrary: they often have trades where they subcontract and are not at all unhappy if you assign those elsewhere. Your combination is more common than you think.

For example, we do it so that we have the exterior shell with roof built and then contract the trades for the interior work ourselves to familiar craftsmen. The architect then only takes over the supervision. Whether this means 1-2 months more construction time and thus rent is already offset by the savings of "not paying a general contractor any profit."

Don't just consider that possible but a very good, if not the most cost-effective solution. The only thing I can't understand is: Why should the general contractor make execution plans again? Those are, of course, made by the architect; the general contractor simply builds according to them.