Planning phase: Building permit / Financing - Procedure

Hello 11ant,

where can I find your house construction schedule with your phase model?
I have only found references to it in the search function. But not the guide itself.

Kind regards

Enter the following with your trusted search provider:

"A house construction roadmap, also for you: the phase model of the HOAI"

I only found references to it in the search function. But not the instructions themselves.

They are publicly available on a so-called internet ;-) - except for the last two parts, which will come in the new year -

enter the following in your trusted search provider: "A house construction roadmap, also for you: the phase model of the HOAI"

... since yesterday, by the way, even commentable :)

Hello everyone,

here is an update from us again.

After some discussions and research (thanks also for the tip regarding the schedule), we are now a step further. We found a competent architect and we want to get started. Here are two questions for the experts:

1) Termination:
Instead of commissioning only the first phases (Module A), the architect sent us a contract with the right to terminate after each phase. I don't see a problem here. Do you?

2) Scope:
I have understood how the fee is calculated proportionally to the net construction sum (we are Zone III three-quarters). However, a question regarding this: if I want to take care of certain trades myself (e.g., interior finishing or parts of it like tiles) (own contribution or simply buying and having the tiles laid without the architect), this does not reduce the construction sum, but the "construction sum under the responsibility of the architect" (let me call it that, I think you understand what I mean).
How is this usually handled?

I have already read that own contributions do not reduce the fee and also understand that for the first planning phases it does not matter to the architect who ultimately performs the work. Nevertheless, it seems strange that, for example, I still pay the architect proportionally for, e.g., purchasing and laying tiles even though he is supposed to do "nothing" here.

In that case, you would have to take the entire construction sum for the first planning phases and then another, reduced construction sum for the subsequent phases... sounds complicated...

What do you say? How is this done in practice?

I advise you against not having essential trades supervised by the architect, as you would then have to coordinate interface problems yourself. Zone 3 three-quarters I personally find quite steep for a single-family house, but maybe that is usual for you? With normal requirements, 3 middle should be sufficient.

Instead of commissioning only the first phases (Module A), the architect sent us a contract with the right to terminate after each phase. I don’t see a problem here. Do you?

Whether this makes a difference depends on the consequences of the termination – that is, whether you have to negotiate over his lost profits from phases no longer rendered or if the paths separate without compensation. I bundled the modules as I did for good reason – namely, that other termination points than after the completion of phases 2 or 5 are not sensible: between phase 2 and 3, a “letting it settle” makes sense and is a classic and frequent point of insight regarding the aspect of whether you rate the “chemistry” together as promising success; the building permit is a “document,” and to build as if it were a plan itself would be foolish, its pictorial attachments are nothing more than dimension-specific sketches at this stage. Having the detailed planning (service phase 5) developed by a “godfather” uninvolved in the conception is at least inefficient – hence my recommendation to have the same planner who also executed phases 1 to 4 take over service phase 5. And the functional section that, with the architect (and possibly the general contractor), forms module C proceeds differently with the general contractor (but without the architect). My module model is not an all-valid universal truth, but the introduction of the (typically layperson) “private home builder” to understanding professional planning processes, created on the basis of my roughly forty years of relevant experience. The HOAI phase model itself is even more established, developed from projecting activity onto its remuneration, and assumes as a normal case the full commissioning of the architect with the entire scope of service phases 1 to 9 (or classically only 8 for private homes), and also neglects the occasionally occurring desire for a change of horses.

if I want to take care of certain trades (e.g., interior finishing or parts thereof like tiling) myself [...] then the construction sum does not decrease, but the “construction sum under the architect’s responsibility” does

A house is an “individual,” it has only one requirements profile for the planner. The projected total costs are no more and no less than a reference measure for fee determination. In this sense, craftsman and own contributions are equivalent to each other, and awarding the contract to the professional or doing it yourself makes merely a cash-effective difference. The architect does the same job whether now Jupp or Manni wields the trowel.