Is there such a person?

rampantbunny

I recently went through a tender process for a new 2 storey build. I've not accepted any of the incoming tenders, so instead am looking at an alternative build route.

I now hope to find all the tradesmen myself, and the required supplies\materials.
But I'd also need someone to manage\coordinate the build i.e. a project manager.
I just don't have the time to coordinate the various trades myself, nor the experience\knowledge to ensure the house is completed to achieve the desired spec and regulations.

Is this project manager type a figment of my imagination?
My architect and a main contractor maintain there is no such person and the best I'll be able to do is get a main contractor who is willing to let me nominate or go direct with certain trades.

sydthebeat

There certainly are project managers.
Some building contractors i know also offer project management services if the client wants to use a lot of their own trades.

But this begs the question, why do you think this would be any cheaper?
A building contractor IS a project manager, specific to building.

One big difference between hiring a building contractor and just a project manager is the responsibility for all insurances / health and safety etc now fall into YOUR lap

mozil

Im sure in the current climate you would be able to find someone without to much difficulty,

I would say someone along the lines of a quantity surveyor Ive even seen people with h&S backround working as P M on a few large jobs i have been on.
plenty of people with these type of qualifications out of work. My advice try sticking an add on donedeal and gumtree outlining your requirements im sure you'll be flooded with calls from people applying in next to no time

rampantbunny

sydthebeat wrote: »

But this begs the question, why do you think this would be any cheaper?

I've gone through an itemised breakdown from the lowest received tender. The figures just seem a little too inflated even factoring in the margins for builders profit.
It will be cheaper for me to leverage from the tradesmen within own family. This is not an assumption, but something I've been pricing.
Plus there are the margins I see each builder adding on to all the materials that are required. Builder has to make a living but some of the margins are stupidly overcooked.
One builder has recently come back with a reviewed quote because he grossly overpriced one particular aspect in his original quote. He rectified his mistake and reduced this particular cost, only to bump up the cost of other items to regain some of the lost profit. What an ass.

sydthebeat wrote: »

A building contractor IS a project manager, specific to building.

Fair point. But I suppose I'm essentially looking for a contractor that doesn't mind the client sourcing materials and trades. Recent conversations with contractors reveal that most are extremely reluctant to let go this trade and that, because of course it cuts their profit.

sydthebeat wrote: »

One big difference between hiring a building contractor and just a project manager is the responsibility for all insurances / health and safety etc now fall into YOUR lap

Noted, unless I find a contractor, prj. mgr who works for a fixed sum, will employ my tradesmen and doesn't expect to make a profit on every single item required for the build. This contractor would control the site and insurance\health and safety are his responsibility.
If this not possible insurance I will get and have at it.

All said and done, project managers are out there of various ilks and the statement from architect that there is no such person to suit my requirements might need a grain of salt.

rampantbunny

mozil wrote: »

Im sure in the current climate you would be able to find someone without to much difficulty,

I would say someone along the lines of a quantity surveyor Ive even seen people with h&S backround working as P M on a few large jobs i have been on.
plenty of people with these type of qualifications out of work. My advice try sticking an add on donedeal and gumtree outlining your requirements im sure you'll be flooded with calls from people applying in next to no time

Hi mozil. Yes, current climate as you say, you'd imagine someone will bite my hand off. All they have to do is oversee the works and assure quality. If they run the site with all insurances that would be great. Difficult part would be vetting someone to fill this space but the same is true for all trades I suppose.

Mellor

rampantbunny wrote: »

I've gone through an itemised breakdown from the lowest received tender. The figures just seem a little too inflated even factoring in the margins for builders profit.
It will be cheaper for me to leverage from the tradesmen within own family. This is not an assumption, but something I've been pricing.
Plus there are the margins I see each builder adding on to all the materials that are required. Builder has to make a living but some of the margins are stupidly overcooked.

Builders price would also include insurance for workers and for the site itself. And his cost for materials would included storage costs if required. Something you mat be overlooking.

Fair point. But I suppose I'm essentially looking for a contractor that doesn't mind the client sourcing materials and trades. Recent conversations with contractors reveal that most are extremely reluctant to let go this trade and that, because of course it cuts their profit.

It sounds like you want to nominate all sub contractors without any mark up. Nominating sub-contractors is fine. But the main contractor will marks ups their cost to cover insurance, security, site works such as scaffolding etc. Your suggestion that he is "simply making a profit on trades" is a bit unfair on him, or maybe you were simply ignorant to these costs.

Noted, unless I find a contractor, prj. mgr who works for a fixed sum, will employ my tradesmen and doesn't expect to make a profit on every single item required for the build. This contractor would control the site and insurance\health and safety are his responsibility.
If this not possible insurance I will get and have at it.

This is possible except for the bolded part.
Insurance isn't free. If you want the contractor/PM/builder to cover insurance. You need to allow for profit on trades.
If you want him to just manage the job, then you need to cover the rest.
insurance won't be difficult to arrange. A savvy PM will arrange this for you and add it to his cost, but it may be in your name.

You may or may not get somebody to work for a fixed price. Reason being delays outside of his control (ie caused by your supply of materials/trades) could hold up the job. With a regular contract, these delays are contractors.
But maybe in the current climate, you might get a PM willing to take a risk and work for a fixed sum.

All said and done, project managers are out there of various ilks and the statement from architect that there is no such person to suit my requirements might need a grain of salt.

There are two main options, either you hire a contractor and he takes ownership of the site and manages start to end.
Or you manage the contract and hire everyone, including the PM, and also arrange the prelim costs.
You need to take the positives with the negatives of either option, you can't just pluck out the positives. Which is probably what meant by there is no such person

sinnerboy

mozil wrote: »

Im sure in the current climate you would be able to find someone without to much difficulty,

If you look in Sydney or Perth. Or Vancouver. Good people don't hang around in vast numbers waiting for such "opportunities".

rampantbunny

Thanks for the comprehensive reply Mellor.

Mellor wrote: »

Builders price would also include insurance for workers and for the site itself. And his cost for materials would included storage costs if required. Something you mat be overlooking.

The tender breakdown is pretty comprehensive. Insurance is itemised separately so I wouldn't expect additional margin on materials for this.
Storage cost, true - had overlooked that and of course I've probably overlooked other things. But I can only gauge\compare tenders based on what is itemised. If a builder is providing a breakdown for a client I'd have expected this to be detailed (not possible for everything I know).

Mellor wrote: »

It sounds like you want to nominate all sub contractors without any mark up. Nominating sub-contractors is fine. But the main contractor will marks ups their cost to cover insurance, security, site works such as scaffolding etc. Your suggestion that he is "simply making a profit on trades" is a bit unfair on him, or maybe you were simply ignorant to these costs.

Re. the nomination versus direct route;
If nomination means I find a tradesman I like and ask the builder to take him on, manage him, pay him etc. then nomination is not what I'm intending. I completely understand and accept that the builder would rightly expect to be paid for this.
What I intend is to find the tradesmen, approach them, get quotes, satisfy myself that their work is good etc, but then get a project manager to oversee their work, coordinate their arrival onsite, and whatever other duties are required that mean I'm not interrupted during the day to get a load of blocks or a few wall ties etc.
If such a project manager existed the logical thing for me would be to ask if he would organise the insurance of the site (which I'm not expecting for free).

Re. the suggestion that a builder is simply making a profit on trades - no one should misconstrue this as builder bashing - I didn't mean it to come across like that.
I was lucky to have a long meeting with one of the builders tendering. The man was honest and told me that if trade a, b and c, were removed from the tender, that he would not make the profit to make it worth his while. Builder is making a profit on trades, plus a profit on materials sourced.

Mellor wrote: »

This is possible except for the bolded part.
Insurance isn't free. If you want the contractor/PM/builder to cover insurance. You need to allow for profit on trades.
If you want him to just manage the job, then you need to cover the rest.
insurance won't be difficult to arrange. A savvy PM will arrange this for you and add it to his cost, but it may be in your name.
You may or may not get somebody to work for a fixed price. Reason being delays outside of his control (ie caused by your supply of materials/trades) could hold up the job. With a regular contract, these delays are contractors.
But maybe in the current climate, you might get a PM willing to take a risk and work for a fixed sum.

I wouldn't expect the PM to pay for insurance out of his own pocket. It would need to be discussed upfront what services he\she provided and what the terms were. They organise insurance, they get paid for their efforts.

Mellor wrote: »

There are two main options, either you hire a contractor and he takes ownership of the site and manages start to end.
Or you manage the contract and hire everyone, including the PM, and also arrange the prelim costs.
You need to take the positives with the negatives of either option, you can't just pluck out the positives. Which is probably what meant by there is no such person

Agreed on the positives and negatives. The massive positives for me when getting a builder are the almost guarantee of finished product, and hassle free process. Plus a central point of contact. But the negative is the cost.
Admittedly I am trying to pluck out the positives - but why not? I'm trying to bridge the gap between this and the direct self-build approach as much as I can to make my life easier. I might find that it's not possible and no one is prepared to do this work but I'll ask the questions at any rate.

Funnily enough my brother has completed his own self-build and has offered to manage mine - but he wants the same margin as per the tenders returned...he's joking off course (I hope).

sinnerboy

rampantbunny wrote: »

But I can only gauge\compare tenders based on what is itemised. If a builder is providing a breakdown for a client I'd have expected this to be detailed

It does cost a builder to provide such information. Do you know that ?

rampantbunny

sinnerboy wrote: »

It does cost a builder to provide such information. Do you know that ?

I do.
Are you saying that because it costs a builder money to be granular in his tender, that certain costs may not be specifically listed and implied in other costs?

sinnerboy

rampantbunny wrote: »

What I intend is to find the tradesmen, approach them, get quotes, satisfy myself that their work is good etc, but then get a project manager to oversee their work, coordinate their arrival onsite, and whatever other duties are required that mean I'm not interrupted during the day to get a load of blocks or a few wall ties etc.

This describes a project manager (you) working with a site foreman ( whom you are labeling project manager )

rampantbunny wrote: »

If such a project manager existed the logical thing for me would be to ask if he would organise the insurance of the site (which I'm not expecting for free). I wouldn't expect the PM to pay for insurance out of his own pocket. It would need to be discussed upfront what services he\she provided and what the terms were. They organise insurance, they get paid for their efforts.

I think I see a dilemma here . In the first quotation what you are describing I interpret ( and I by modest extension I suggest most in the industry will interpret) is that you are looking for site foreman.

In the second quotation you are assigning roles that don't really fit with a typical site foreman ( no howls of protest please - I totally respect what site foremen do ) .

This is what I think your architect and would be contractor are telling you. You are seeking something of a hybrid . A player manager in sporting parlance.

I don't say don't try. But I am am trying to help you understand what you are seeking.

And - trying to help here , and not meaning to convey any disrespect to you - your "quest for value" may be being communicated inadvertently to would be contractors as " you won't make a penny out me " . Maybe - is all I'm saying.

sinnerboy

rampantbunny wrote: »

I do.
Are you saying that because it costs a builder money to be granular in his tender, that certain costs may not be specifically listed and implied in other costs?

Very much so.

rampantbunny

sinnerboy wrote: »

This describes a project manager (you) working with a site foreman ( whom you are labeling project manager )
...In the first quotation what you are describing I interpret ( and I by modest extension I suggest most in the industry will interpret) is that you are looking for site foreman.
In the second quotation you are assigning roles that don't really fit with a typical site foreman ( no howls of protest please - I totally respect what site foremen do ) .

I've incorrect titles attributed to the different players so that doesn't help at all...thanks for the clarifications.

sinnerboy wrote: »

This is what I think your architect and would be contractor are telling you. You are seeking something of a hybrid . A player manager in sporting parlance.

rampantbunny wrote: »

I now hope to find all the tradesmen myself, and the required supplies\materials.
But I'd also need someone to manage\coordinate the build i.e. a project manager.
I just don't have the time to coordinate the various trades myself, nor the experience\knowledge to ensure the house is completed to achieve the desired spec and regulations.

This was my requirement when discussing project with architect and builder i.e. we discussed my first quotation (no mention of additional pieces such as insurances etc), which if I understand correctly is more akin to a site manager?
If so, I think architect and builder were at the very least, a bit flippant to say no such person exists.

sinnerboy wrote: »

And - trying to help here , and not meaning to convey any disrespect to you - your "quest for value" may be being communicated inadvertently to would be contractors as " you won't make a penny out me " . Maybe - is all I'm saying.

I'm taking no offence at all from any of your post, but not sure how my seeking value would ever have been communicated to builders, inadvertently or other, as me being a tight *ss .
If referring to builders that have already been approached to tender, 500k to 625k is too much for a 3300ft2 house IMO. But that will remain my opinion only, unless I reveal my plans to all on boards to gauge.

"quest for value" = "just be reasonable"
I've looked at certain absolute items that I know the price of. One such item is on a tender at fully twice the price it would cost me to buy. Take a little out for fitting, and the builder could pay for their insurance from that item alone. Another example, adding material for two chimneys - but I have only one. And over 100k for boundary walls...Builder says "oh, wait a sec, allow me to rectify my mistake..here you go, an updated costing. I fixed it, but I took the opportunity to add on exactly €1000 (no rationale or mathematical formula required) to 4 or 5 other items". So, if builders reading interpret this as them not making a penny out of me that wouldn't be accurate, but they certainly won't make the thousands the recent crop of potentials expect.


Again, I stress I don't intend this to be builder bashing (I'm still approaching builders) - but I have reasons for investigating other options that might get me to a reasonable level of spend.

All the info is much appreciated.

sydthebeat

i assume youve had at least 3 quotes, and they have all been between 500k and 625k ??

I wont comment on the "per sq ft" cost because ive no idea of the design or specification, but it sounds like either or both the design and specification is 'outside the norm' ?? would this be correct? and i assume its a turn key contract?

If i was you, and not in a hurry, i would go seek another 3 tenders elsewhere. If the prices are coming back similar then thats the market value for the work.

Trying to approach it from more of a self build aspect will have its own pit falls.

rampantbunny

sydthebeat wrote: »

i assume youve had at least 3 quotes, and they have all been between 500k and 625k ??

I wont comment on the "per sq ft" cost because ive no idea of the design or specification, but it sounds like either or both the design and specification is 'outside the norm' ?? would this be correct? and i assume its a turn key contract?

If i was you, and not in a hurry, i would go seek another 3 tenders elsewhere. If the prices are coming back similar then thats the market value for the work.

Trying to approach it from more of a self build aspect will have its own pit falls.

Yes, the finish is almost turn key. So maybe the prices on the whole are reasonable, but I can't reconcile with some of the charges on those things that I can cost. E.g. I have 5 roof lights (660 x 1180), priced @ 800 each (flashing not included). Is this a realistic figure?

I'm lining up other builders and will see where it all stacks up. Think this was your advice on another reply to my post elsewhere and it is still sound advice.

sinnerboy

rampantbunny wrote: »

If referring to builders that have already been approached to tender, 500k to 625k is too much for a 3300ft2 house IMO.

For showroom / turnkey standard , including ALL siteworks - this is about what you will pay.

rampantbunny

sinnerboy wrote: »

For showroom / turnkey standard , including ALL siteworks - this is about what you will pay.

Considering the quotes range from 500 to 625k I don't think I'd agree that this is about what it would cost, or are you taking a middle ground figure of 562?
And the architect even thinks the prices are too high.

Regardless, it doesn't help me understand the extra cost associated with some items Sinnerboy, even factoring in hidden charges for things I as a layperson might be ignorant of.

We're unintentionally veering off into a discussion of the costs associated with builders versus self build. Not the aim of the original post but all the information is great to have.

sydthebeat

rampantbunny wrote: »

Yes, the finish is almost turn key. So maybe the prices on the whole are reasonable, but I can't reconcile with some of the charges on those things that I can cost. E.g. I have 5 roof lights (660 x 1180), priced @ 800 each (flashing not included). Is this a realistic figure?

I'm lining up other builders and will see where it all stacks up. Think this was your advice on another reply to my post elsewhere and it is still sound advice.

€500 would be closer, but i dont know if that quote includes installation?? id suggest it does

sinnerboy

Try this FYI

Consider this as a method to procure the house

1. Be your own project manager. Obtain all insurances yourself . I don't think anyone else will do the job to your satisfaction and I mean that as a compliment.
2. Hire a good site foreman to keep manners on all the trades. Do not undervalue this role.
3. Hire a QS to help you prepare a works program and cost plan and most importantly retain as a "friendly voice" / advisory when the build tends to drive you nuts ( it does to the best of us ) . The learning curve for the novice cam make the head spin!

.

sinnerboy

rampantbunny wrote: »

but I can't reconcile with some of the charges on those things that I can cost. E.g. I have 5 roof lights (660 x 1180), priced @ 800 each (flashing not included). Is this a realistic figure?

Have you provided the builders with a pricing template or bill of quantities or just drawings ?

rampantbunny

sinnerboy wrote: »

Have you provided the builders with a pricing template or bill of quantities or just drawings ?

Architect managed the tender process and drew up tender doc with approx. 30 headings, under which builders were supposed to list their prices. I say supposed, because 2 out of 5 didn't bother (maybe because it costs them money as you pointed out before).
One builder has recently provided a better breakdown so I can see where the money is being spent (it is this breakdown that I'm using to compare the cost of items I can source versus the cost of builder sourcing). If money were no object, he'd have the job no questions.

Look, I would have preferred to see a more granular document issued in the first place, but maybe the architect was trying to save me the expense of doing this or getting a QS - it just wasn't communicated.


Thanks for the link and the step by step. I have a feeling it will be adopted.

DOCARCH

rampantbunny wrote: »

If money were no object, he'd have the job no questions.

Have you considered sitting down with this contractor (or any of the others) and discussing their price, your budget and between you see if there is some compromise.

I am not suggesting that you simply bargain/bash down the builders price/tender, but, the builder (and his QS), and your own architect - between them all - should be able to suggest some areas they feel that savings could be made or changes could be made to save money...a 'value engineering' exercise...without compromising the overall design?

rampantbunny

DOCARCH wrote: »

Have you considered sitting down with this contractor (or any of the others) and discussing their price, your budget and between you see if there is some compromise.

I am not suggesting that you simply bargain/bash down the builders price/tender, but, the builder (and his QS), and your own architect - between them all - should be able to suggest some areas they feel that savings could be made or changes could be made to save money...a 'value engineering' exercise...without compromising the overall design?

I did have a sit down with the builder and my architect. We ran through the whole site, and areas where costs could be reduced were tabled.
The builder was helpful but total savings were not considerable enough to make the final tender attractive to me. OK, at most 50k was to be saved but to me it wasn't enough, without having to take some major losses in terms of design.

The exercise did highlight certain areas that were not considered properly by architect or engineer. Decisions made that simply put cost me more money than was necessary for want of a few minor tweaks. The builder pointed these out.
A little disappointed with the professionals, but no toys out of the pram or anything.
I'm still considering returning to the original builders and seeing what they can do with a revised plan - but as I said above, I can't see any way of it coming in at a price I'd consider. Keeping my options open however.

mfceiling

This was a post from the live self build thread on here OP. The poster built to Passive standard and is/was a great contributer to this entire forum.


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=73407316&postcount=1173

rampantbunny

mfceiling wrote: »

This was a post from the live self build thread on here OP. The poster built to Passive standard and is/was a great contributer to this entire forum.


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=73407316&postcount=1173

Thanks mfceiling.
I'm drawing a parallel between sas getting his carpenter to handle the day to day stuff, and my target of getting a site foreman.
I'm admitting upfront that I wouldn't have the first clue when it comes to ensuring the details are executed properly. Not sure how much Sas did himself but will look his posts up for sure. Cheers.

sinnerboy

Look too to the words of another smart self builder here. Note his comment on the QS.

sinnerboy

rampantbunny wrote: »

One builder ... What an ass.

statement from architect .....might need a grain of salt.

I think architect and builder were at the very least, a bit flippant

the architect was trying to save me the expense of doing this or getting a QS - it just wasn't communicated.

A little disappointed with the professionals,

The builder was helpful but ... not enough

I don't quote your words to mock undermine or embarrass you here but I don't think I'd like to work with you. At least not in your current mindset.

No one wants to pay too much. This is very stressful for you clearly. Building is challenging even for those of us involved in it for all of our working lives.

You badly , badly need a good QS. Again in sporting parlance you are finding fault with your team players when you have good strikers and midfielders but no defense.

rampantbunny

sinnerboy wrote: »

I don't quote your words to mock undermine or embarrass you here but I don't think I'd like to work with you. At least not in your current mindset.

No one wants to pay too much. This is very stressful for you clearly. Building is challenging even for those of us involved in it for all of our working lives.

You badly , badly need a good QS. Again in sporting parlance you are finding fault with your team players when you have good strikers and midfielders but no defense.

Sinnerboy, no doubt your intentions are good but I'd have to be a zen master not to take a little offence from that. To paraphrase another poster earlier on this thread, you can't take the negatives without the positives (Mellor) and some of my phrases are singled out without accompanying text to give context.

Re. me clearly being stressed - surprised to hear that because it is not true and is an assumption.
IMO this is a phrase bandied about as a get out clause for too many things these days (no offence to anyone suffering 'real' stress). I actually could't be happier as our first born is just 5 weeks old. And before anyone comments that I must definitely want to get my build done in a hurry or I'm "clearly" suffering from no sleep - this is not the case.

Let's not dwell on the above because it's not easy to build an accurate picture from a persons posts.


My mindset; well I must be pretty demanding.
I started out with complete trust in the professionals on the job, but it is a fact that:

• mistakes have been made that should have been caught
• assumptions have been made on my behalf (to get things out in a hurry...I've been told this directly)
• some tenders have been returned incomplete
• some items have been added when they are not required
• some of the margins are inexplicable (to the ignorant novice at least but if I were a builder I'd appreciate that implying a cost (without explanation) in an item the customer can readily source themselves is bound to raise a question.

Come on now, who wouldn't be disappointed?
But I've had no arguments, no one has been made to feel stupid and I still retain these guys - like I said, no toys out of the pram.

If you were to provide services to me, you didn't mind answering questions (clearly you don't), you didn't make assumptions (hmm ) that cost your client extra, and just did a professional\good job - there would be no problem.

As for getting a QS, I never said yes I was or no I wasn't planning on this because it was not a discussion point. It is just being assumed that I am not getting one. Truth is I always intended to do this if taking a more solo approach.
Now, if you mean I perhaps should have employed a QS earlier for the tender process - given what I've learned so far, I definitely agree. But I am a novice and architect was controlling all aspects (and as I said, maybe he was trying to save me money - there, a positive :P).

fclauson indicates he questioned everything in his post (thanks for that btw). That is where I am. That is why I'm looking for alternatives.

sinnerboy

Excellent response. You are right I am challenging you , even provoking truth be told , in an attempt to assist you. I think you will succeed very well with this project. Don't be disappointed looking back - be wiser.

rampantbunny

sinnerboy wrote: »

...Don't be disappointed looking back - be wiser.

If that isn't a zen master at work, I don't know what is.