With or without an architectural plan? (General contractor / shell construction)

Hello!
We have a plot of land and want to build.
At the end of 2017, we had contact with a log house company that immediately convinced us. We found the consultations to be good and comprehensive, the houses viewed were very nice, the expected price top. So we commissioned the experienced and likeable company architect with the first drawings and building pre-application.

Problem: for the finished house from the top edge of the base slab a price was initially given to us that was at least 100K lower than it would actually be (all just estimated, because we would have to buy the trades ourselves). Now we want to look at other providers, e.g. timber frame construction, or determine the actual price of the trades.

A friend who is an architect has been trying to convince us for a long time to first create a detailed plan that not only includes the house plan and floor plan but also all services/materials described in detail, and to use this plan to obtain offers from general contractors or trades.
After the first disappointment, the approach now seems sensible to us in order to avoid surprises during/after the construction phase.

Problem: the said plan is not exactly cheap.
And I ask myself: what if it is unnecessary? If we, for example, should commission a general contractor who in any case produces transparent offers and has no hidden costs? Is there such a thing? ;) (It seems to me that Keitel-Haus and hagemann are transparent. Both offer rather cheaper packages with plans, submission, etc.).

I look forward to your opinions and experiences!

I would argue that one excludes the other. On the one hand, you want to define all "services and materials" in advance and then go to a general contractor with the plan.

That’s not how the game works. Every general contractor has their standard service portfolio. Most will also build your floor plan and exterior views, but the basis will always initially be the general contractor’s construction service description. Next, you would try to see what fits and what needs/should be changed. Companies differ in their flexibility here. The fact is, since there are fixed suppliers, not every exactly selected facing brick, not the exotic tile, and every other wish will be fulfillable. Even with a shell construction, much is fixed – and then you end up back at your initial problem: You have to take care of things yourself, get offers for the remaining work yourself. The price is difficult to calculate in advance.

… in the end, you pay for many services twice for nothing.

That’s why, from my point of view, a clear separation. Preliminary planning with individual awarding or floor plan with general contractor and incorporation of one or the other "special feature".

Problem: said plan is not exactly cheap. And I wonder: what if it is unnecessary?

How can a plan be unnecessary?

which creates transparent offers anyway and has no hidden costs? Is there such a thing? ;) (it seems to me that Keitel-Haus and Hagemann are transparent. Both rather offer cheaper packages with plan, submission, etc.).

What do you understand by "transparent costs"? A general contractor calculates and coordinates the trades, does the tenders and the logistics. This is reflected in every item. I don't know what is transparent to the end consumer, because the general contractor will not let you look into their books or disclose their profit. Neither Keitel-Haus nor Hagemann will. And if I have to pay a flat rate for the building application, hidden costs are certainly included. Whether the actual ones that arise or those that the general contractors pocket as fees. And what would be incomprehensible about that now?

Problem: said plan is not exactly cheap.

How much is the plan supposed to cost? Does/will the architect invoice according to HOAI?

Thank you for your feedback YPG :)

A plan really needs to be made, the question is whether with an external, independent or an in-house architect.

By "transparent" I mean that the main contractor really lists all costs. As laymen, something might escape us. Or is this concern unfounded? Or are there ways to be sure that we don't overlook anything?

According to HOAI, our friend architect would not charge, since he is from Austria. And maybe we pay in kind. However, it is still open whether we take a German architect after all, to simplify the official procedures: in that case it would probably be cheaper, not according to HOAI?

A plan really has to be made, the question is whether with an external, independent or with an in-house architect.

I consider a design by a freelance architect qualitatively more valuable than one by an employee. The freelancer is more innovative – every project is advertising for their name.

By "transparent" I mean that the general contractor really lists all costs

But he doesn’t. He doesn’t write costs x plus profit y equals z, to be paid. His items are mixed calculations, as almost every trade uses. A business has to make profits. And why should he reveal his operating costs to be transparent for the customer? I don’t understand how you mean or expect that. Otherwise, has already written a lot.

And maybe we will pay in kind.

I don't dare to ask because I'm afraid of the answer. :p

I don't understand how you mean that or expect it.

I think the OP rather means that cost items will come up for her that were not included in the offer. (Installation, items "provided by the client", entrance platform, etc.)