Recommendations for a construction company or general contractor near Offenburg/Lahr

However, I thank you for the inspiration for a post with the subject "Target Agreements with the Architect". .... But thanks already for the hint - you often can't see the forest for the trees when it comes to the questions a prospective builder asks himself!

Great idea ! Even if it comes too late for me. Actually, the prospective builder should be clear before the contract about what he expects from the architect and record that in writing! The prospective builder usually doesn't know that so precisely in advance... Do I want the architect not to say "no more" after the 3rd correction in the draft? Record it! Do I want to be shown 3D pictures at some point? - Record it! Do I want to be finished at an agreed date? Record it! ....

Great idea @11ant! Even if it comes too late for me.

I actually put the idea on my to-do list – but I see it less pessimistically that it comes too late for you.

In fact, the prospective builder should be clear about what he expects from the architect before the contract and put that in writing!

I originally wrote that – largely inspired by you – because of the aspect of "dawdling architects," who in my observation (more than isolated cases) are a new phenomenon. But what you write further on are other aspects, namely changed expectations of clients that need to be communicated:

Do I want the architect to say after the third correction to the design that he’s no longer interested?

Actually, the architect owes his client one approval-capable design. That the client has read in forums how other builders tease their draftsman with fifty-seven changes back and forth and maybe think that "it has to be like that," the architect does not suspect on his own. Aside from that, in my opinion, there’s no need to fly loops in the final approach if the builder introduces in a disciplined way in service phase 2 what is to be discussed.

Do I also want to be shown 3D images sometimes?

That is not only an additional wish but also not entirely harmless (since it practically requires software that is not part of the professional planning process). That means you produce an elaboration that is then not automatically compiled into further planning. Errors can creep in there.

Actually, the architect owes his client a approvable design.

But in reality, this is a very specific problem.

A couple describes to the architect their wishes/size/room program.
The architect makes a design that hardly corresponds to this.
He complies with the request to improve it; now about 50% of what was wanted is correct.
No discussion about the facade etc. has taken place yet. The kitchen should be a bit bigger, the window a bit wider—etc... after the second meeting there is the request to include this.
The architect communicates that an invoice must now be issued, as he has already submitted two designs which he considers "approvable."

The specific problem: the architect delivers an approvable design that was never ordered like this. The client is supposed to pay. If architect planning works like this, I can only recommend to EVERY private client not to sign standard architect contracts... then you can forget your wishes/ideas...
GD

Couple describes architect wishes/size/room program.
Architect makes a design that hardly corresponds to this.

A design is created in phase 3 of the service, which is preceded by a preliminary design in phase 2 that should have been discussed. Change requests should have been fully incorporated from the preliminary design into the design; otherwise, I see phase 3 as inadequately fulfilled.