JUNE 2024 ISSUE
“People who build their own home tend to be very courageous. These people are curious about life. They’re thinking about what it means to live in a house, rather than just buying a commodity and making it work.”
– Tom Kundig, Architect
Many assume that having a custom house designed is akin to tailoring a custom suit. You spend a few minutes with the tailor, they take your measurements, they go to work, and before you know it, you are presented with a beautiful new suit! Nothing could be further from the truth, as any client who has been through the process can tell you. There are literally thousands of decision that you and/or your architect must make, usually during numerous meeting, often over several months. Even more decisions are required once the builder is engaged. Paraphrasing Tom Kudos, it is not the easy path, it is an act of courage. If properly navigated, however, it is truly rewarding – a beautiful new suit!
This post explores the fourth phase of architectural service – procurement. Having designed and developed the house in the first two phases (schematic design and design development), and having generated construction drawing and a project manual in the third phase (construction documents), it is time to turn all this effort into a tangible home. Enter the builder. And for many, enter the lender.
If you are able and wish to pay cash for the house, you can skip the lender. For most of us, this is not an option and you must determine the best financial arrangement for your situation. Most of our clients navigate those water with other specialists. The lender, wanting to protect their investment, routinely imposes stipulations to the financing. It is typical for these stipulations to include an estimate or bid from a licensed general contractor (also referred to as the builder) and a written contract with that builder (also referred to as the agreement). They normally impose time restraints to keep the project moving, usually 12 months, although extensions are often requested and granted. These are the kind of arrangements I see most often in my practice, as well as the arrangements encountered in the construction of the dinky House.
Let’s dip our toe into the subject of contracts. In general, there are two different types of contracts in common use for residential construction projects. In Fixed Price contracts, the Contractor stipulates in their bid exactly what the cost of the project will be, including the builder’s fee. The builder assumes a fair amount of risk in this arrangement and some builders will not even work this way, especially post-COVID. Cost Plus contracts stipulate that the builder will pass along all of the costs for labor and materials to the Owner, who will pay them. On top of that, the builder fee is added, which is normally a percentage of the actual construction cost, but could also be a stipulated sum. In this scenario the Owner is taking on more of the risk and does not truly know the actual cost of construction, until the house is completed. Each type of contract has advantages and disadvantages, and both are used successfully hundreds of times every day. I stumbled across a blog post recently that provides a really good overview of these two types of contracts. If you want to dip your whole foot into the subject, check out Fixed Price vs. Cost Plus: Which Is Better?
There are a few builders who are open to working on either a fixed cost or a cost plus basis, but most stick to one or the other, and nowadays, most stick to cost plus. Most architects have a number of builders that they work with on a regular basis, which is a benefit for Owners who usually don’t know who they should use. Sometimes Owners know exactly who they want to use. In such cases, it may or may not be someone with whom the architect has worked. In these cases I do a little investigative due diligence to make sure I am comfortable with them as well. Sometimes they cause me concern and I pass that along to the Owner. Most of the time, however, they check out. On occasion, they even become one of those builders we use on a regular basis.
Since I live in the Rocket City, many of my clients are/were engineers, or are involved in technical fields. I always feel compelled to inform them that they are about to enter another world – that of residential construction. For starters, most residential builders are comparatively disorganized. Although they might be able to pull together a bid and a schedule at the start, keeping them updated is a struggle. Paperwork, in general, is a struggle. And every builder seems to be have developed a unique way of getting paid. Many want to get paid every Friday morning. A few will only invoice a handful of times over the course of the project, when the coffers start to run dry. Some, inspired by lawyers I suppose, require a retainer, which the Owner has to replenish periodically. Different lenders also deliver funds in different ways, so this is something that you’ll need to coordinate. Don’t be surprised if you have to step in periodically. Keeping the builder paid keeps the builder happy and the project running. A happy builder does not insure that he’ll be on site working every day, but an unhappy builder will drag their feet, or stop dead in their tracks.
Which brings us to another reality. Houses, for the most part, are primarily assembled on site. Despite staggering changes in other fields, construction has changed relatively little over the decades. Components, windows for example, are now assembled in a factory and shipped to the site; however, the savings in time is often offset by shipping and coordination. Since we continue to build largely on site, we are subject to weather-related delays and less precise tolerances.
Tasks required in construction are often dependent on other preceding tasks. This series of tasks is called the critical path. It is not unusual for the project to be at a standstill while everyone down the path waits for the concrete to be pumped, or the drywall to be taped and mudded (both real life examples from the dinky House). Unfortunately, lapses in the critical path are inevitable. If one added up the duration of all the critical path tasks, with no lapses, a project would probably be completed in 4 to 6 months; however, once you factor in bad weather, unreliable subcontractors, pipeline delays, scheduling conflicts, and the like, the timeline normally gets stretched to a year or so. Expect it, or you’ll drive yourself mad!
None of these comments are intended to be a dig at builders. In my youth I worked summers for builders and I still have great respect for builders, at least most of them. Managing subs, working with owners and architects, coordinating product and material deliveries, and just running the construction company; this is not easy work. Builders earn their fee. Some owners somehow conclude that they can save a bunch of money by being their own contractor. That is rarely the case, unless you abandon your day job. Usually when the Owner is acting as the Builder (which is allowed in residential construction), the result is even more cost, more construction problems, and a longer completion time.
There are few builders in rural DeKalb county, where the dinky house is located. I knew only one, Phil Owen. He had built a near-by custom home for one of our firm’s clients in the area a couple of years prior. I called to see if he was interested. Some builders are flattered to be selected by an architect to do their own home. Others run like the wind! Fortunately Phil was in the former camp and agreed to take on the project. He reviewed my drawings and prepared a budget and schedule. I submitted it to the credit union, they approved it, and away we went!
BONUS Material:
The late John Warner Wallace and Frances Garth Wallace were a great example of courageous clients. While living and working in Athens, Alabama, they squirreled away money for years, and planned intently for their dream home – a southern greek revival house, for living and entertaining. Frances Wallace and Paul Rudolph (a future “starchitect”) attended Athens High School together and Frances followed the rise of Rudolph’s career. When the Wallaces decided to build, Mrs. Wallace reached out to Rudolph. Neither she, nor Mr. Wallace, nor Rudolph were sure if the arrangement would succeed. Paul was, after all, a modern architect. But it did work. Paul boiled down what it was about the greek revival style that interested the Wallaces, and was able to reinterpret those things in a more contemporary manner. The house design was envisioned with an all white exterior, featuring a grand colonnade comprised of a series of substantial brick columns. The interiors were open and light. The Wallaces bought in. They collaborated with Rudolph on the design and then engaged a local contractor, who realized the vision in bricks and mortar. The results landed the house a feature spread in Life magazine.
we shape space 