Layout of city villa 164 sqm solidly built on a rear plot

The only major change was the relocation of the entrance "further down -

Without this change, the floor plan itself (without evaluating the house on the plot) has already improved. The change makes everything worse!

My reasoning for not having an architect: I can summarize it briefly. We liked the attached floor plan so much that we considered hiring an architect unnecessary.

Oh, the old misinterpretation of the architect as a floor plan drawer. That has always been an own goal.

I was so enthusiastic about the floor plan. It was already somewhat tailored to our needs. The only major change was the relocation of the entrance "further down – towards the southwest" and the spatial separation of the living area from the dining area. In my eyes, it wasn’t so bad at all.

You changed something very essential, namely the basic shape from square to landscape format. This daring step was surprisingly well survived by the design. The original shape reminds me of the house of (whom I just nudged three times on Line 3).

All the more grateful I am for the helpful comments.
The binding of the building application to the second building line restricts me quite a bit in terms of placement. I have illustrated what I mean in the site plan with the red line. This condition leaves me no choice but to pave half of my property for the driveway (which annoys me greatly). Or am I missing a possibility there?

Which comments were those specifically – and are they even still helpful, given the original idea of your land-use planner to declare the rear edge of the building window as the building line? – good advice is expensive here, and generosity regarding sealing is almost a requirement of fairness.

I would immediately spend money to hire an architect but as an outsider to the industry, how am I supposed to find out who does a good job. What I’ve learned is that an architect’s web presence does not indicate their competence.

I recently wrote about this in and – and by now you should also have found out how to get in touch with me – then I’ll find your architect.

You changed something very fundamental, namely the basic form from square to landscape format. This daring step has surprisingly survived the design intact. The original form reminds me of the house of @WilderSueden (whom I just nudged on line 3).

It is indeed quite similar to ours. I’m quite glad that we left out the study on the ground floor. Thanks to the three window sides, the open-plan room clearly gains in real and perceived size. That is more important for our ~130sqm than for 164sqm. Upstairs, we have it a bit differently, but next time I would solve it similarly to this. The extension is great in one way... craftsmen can walk directly from the front door into the utility room with their dirty shoes, and the entrance area is rounded off. But the house becomes extremely wide because of it. In retrospect, I would seriously consider making the house wider overall and omitting the extension.

Hello dear people,

I followed the tip from the forum not to shy away from contacting an architect (A.). The initial conversation went well and we will discuss an appointment next week to determine the requirements. Initially, 2 hours are scheduled for just under 300 euros. For service phases 1 - 2 and the then commissioned service phase 3 following mutual chemistry, the architect, who appears professionally and socially competent, wants to bill according to HOAI. That means for a city villa with 160 sqm service phases 1 - 3 about 14,000 euros. He would not accept a flat rate. In my planning, I had estimated 7,500 - 9,000 for the architect. My feeling here in the forum was that one should basically negotiate a flat fee with an architect. Would that be a novelty for you? At abetterplace, these services are offered for 6,000 - 9,000 euros. The disadvantages are obvious (no local proximity etc.), nevertheless many architects have a good reputation and work examples.

Best regards

Richard

At Abetterplace, the 1-3 are sometimes even offered for 3500€. I don't know what to make of that? is an expert, maybe he can explain that?

Hello dear people, I have taken the forum's advice not to shy away from contacting an architect (A.).

Hello dear Richard, I can only highly recommend that to you (and my reply to your email from the evening before last will follow shortly, I was still busy on the blog this morning). Your plot (because it is a rear plot) is already of significantly higher quality to be planned by a self-hired architect than by a general contractor’s draftsman, even without the slope. In addition, in your special case (because of the - in my opinion also legally risky - building line), a preliminary inquiry to clarify the exemption is advisable. I see this building line as a mortgage on the planning possibilities and would find it, to put it mildly, "desirable" to be able to soften it a little. Your house wish itself is mainstream enough that I can at least understand the inclination to initially settle for a draftsman.

The initial conversation went well and next week we will discuss a scheduling appointment for the requirement. Two hours are first set for just under 300 euros. For service phases 1 - 2 and then service phase 3, commissioned after mutual chemistry, he, the architect who seems professionally and socially competent, [.>.]

Have you now had this appointment with the architect whose professional assessment you did not dare to entrust yourself with last week? (After initial research, I could understand the assessment "socially competent," but I have not yet formed a final opinion on his professional competence).

[.<.] to be billed according to HOAI. That means for a city villa with 160 sqm service phases 1 - 3 about 14,000 euros. He would not accept a flat rate.

When extrapolated to the recommended overall mandate scope of service phases 1 to 8, that would be a proud approximately 40,300 euros (excluding the Brahmin visit for the blessing of the house), which seems a bit princely to me for a single-family home without golden faucets.

At abetterplace, these services are offered for 6,000 - 9,000 euros. The disadvantages are self-evident (no local proximity, etc.), yet many architects have a good reputation and examples of work.

I am happy to find you an architect near your building location, but in my assessment, "A better Place" also has an appropriate network of cooperation partners. I just do not yet fully understand their organization. Their assessment that the same design can be implemented equally well in different construction methods is, in my estimation, wishful thinking. There are price examples explained on their website that seem somewhat discount-like to me, but I still basically consider them to be reputable, and I also find your fee expectation consistent with reality. As is generally known, I expressly recommend module A in the scope of phases 1 and 2, even if—assuming a good gut feeling about the suitability of the planner—you will connect at least phase 3 to it on both construction method tracks.

At Abetterplace phases 1-3 are sometimes offered for 3,500 euros. I don’t know what to make of that? @11ant is an expert, maybe he can explain?

I assume you don’t mean the term expert for me as an insult, although I am allergic to it nonetheless: the common parlance calls contemporaries of the caliber of Professor Unsinn & Co. experts, who spread their personal opinions on TV prime time as "scientific soundbites." Therefore, I don’t want to be labeled in the same way and prefer the term specialist, which I also consider a realizable self-commitment.

But now to the content of your question: I know "A better Place" as a cooperation partner of Beuler, a consultant and construction supervisor specializing in prefabricated houses. It is therefore obvious that they offer a commissioning scope optimized for the concept of this cooperation. Clients advised by me and/or following my house-building roadmap in the default version would certainly also commission these architects, but initially only for "module A" in the scope of phases 1 and 2. I consider commissioning architects universally recommendable, but not already in a first contractual portion beyond the dough-resting phase.

The offer structure of such architects unfortunately still needs to be "explained" today, but in my conviction not for long. In my view, they already belong to the category "Architects 2030"—in the project dimension dominant here in the forum (single-family house with or without granny flat, building class 1 / notification procedure / freestanding eligible), the application of HOAI regarding their phase model (omitting the superfluous phase 9) is very helpful, however, regarding their fee table it is "not expedient" bordering on "inappropriate." The magistrate today no longer wears a Mozart wig with his robe. Architects for single-family homes regularly deal with private clients acting in their own interest, and lumping them and their projects together with public clients or investors in multi-family construction is like shooting sparrows with cannons.

Expecting a lump sum fee offer from an architect seems to me contemporary and expedient for a private home project, and that within about two weeks after the introductory meeting with setting expectations (not before that). An acquisition meeting may be offered without charge, but for the introductory meeting a flat or hourly fee is appropriate. If I were an architect, I would take the hourly wage of a lawyer (if the client comes with a wish list) or a chief physician (if the client comes with a three-dimensional presentation). Immediately spitting out a price for the further procedure would rather speak against a conscientious architect in my opinion. Wisely weighed—as I said, about two weeks of reflection time seems an appropriate expectation and fair for all parties—one can better find a suitable fee. Up to this point, I would consult one or two architects; mass castings would be nonsense ;-)

Conclusion: Lump sum fee yes (but not immediately), fee level market-appropriate and fair, commissioning scope initially only up to the dough-resting phase and with extension options, observing the mnemonic "3 + 5 = 8."