I may be a little impartial, but I would suggest finding a contractor to work with you and then build the home. A design & build will be more intone with your wants and when you start to build you should have a good working relationship. Building a home can be VERY stressful if not paired with the right person. Good Luck and Happy Home Building

Architect-bid vs Design-Build vs Build-Design

Always the issue! For me as a decades long design builder, the group that is going to execute the design and be involved with the client the most is the most critical.

Architect-Bid often assumes the critical differentiator between builder/remodeler is price. They also often assume that the client needs protection from the (implied) dishonest contractor. I submit that if there is a lack of trust, the client and the contractor shouldn’t be working together.

Build-Design – Buying the cheap (and/or inexperienced) design build firm often results in “build-design” – poorly planned and reactionary construction that can end up as a series of patches rather than a well-conceived and executed design and project

Design-Build – for me, marries both the worlds (design and construction). This requires a mutually respected team of a designer; a builder; and an owner. The team is fairly paid for their expertise and work and the client’s budget, wants and needs all get respected. Win-win-win!

Whichever way is chosen there should be a very close relationship among all parties involved. If I were to have a house built (which has never happened), I would make sure to make daily visits to the building site to ensure that my wants were satisfied. That way the builder would expect me & if necessary I would be available to answer any questions he may have. I would also suggest setting up regular meetings with the parties throughout the process so there would be less chance of miscommunication.

Both methods have significant advantages and disadvantages which are way too long to discuss on this board. But here are some of the basics.

Design-build gets you working with the builder from the onset. That is a very good process since the builder can be very influential with the final product to your advantage. However, this method also, typically, locks in you to working with that builder, before you know the final cost of the home.

Having the plans designed by the architect first, allows you the flexibility to shop around using the plans for apples to apples comparison. This shopping process can help you decide which builder is right for you and potentially you will end up with a higher value (produce/service to price ratio) since you have several builders competing. However, since the architect is not a builder s/he may not have the projects financial interest at the forefront and the actual house can be designed to be more expensive to build.

If you can find a builder you want to work with, based on all the various criteria, and have them either perform a design build contract with you , or at least sit in with the architect (even if you have to pay them for their time before a contract is signed) that would be optimal.

Otherwise, you can always have the plans ready for bidding and once you decide on a builder be flexible enough to revise those plans if the builder gives you worthy feedback.

No matter what you do, hire a good local real estate attorney to review the contract with the builder!!! Don't skimp out on this step!!

Best of luck and success with your project.