I'd start with the builder. The builder you want is looking forward to working with his favorite architect again. That's the architect you want.

Choose an architect who usually works in your budget range, not two or three times higher. If you are upfront about your budget (including contingency), it will save a lot of architect re-designing time (=money) when you get the cost estimates. An architect who lives and works 30 minutes away may not be familiar with your town's requirements. Working farms are different from weekend farms.

There are some architects who design in a range of styles, others design in one style only. Look at their online portfolios.

You do not want the builder to make the important decisions such as selecting the architect.

You do not want a builder and architect you've fallen in love with to find out if they're compatible on your job. This is all about relationships, and in this case you want tried and true. You don't need to like your architect; he's a sub. Your builder, however, does.

Imagine you're a architect sitting at your desk and your phone rings. It's some strange couple who don't know your work, but may be interested in your services. The phone rings again and it's Bob the Builder. He tells you Mr. and Ms. Schabotnik are going to be calling soon. You've drawn houses for the last eight of the ten people Bob has thrown your way over the last 5 years. Which call gets your priority?

A relationship is good but far from essential. A good builder will build a great house designed by a good architect that they've never met.

Architect does not need to be local. It's much more important that you have a good relationship with your architect and that you are both in sync on style and budget. The architect does need to be intelligent enough to design within code for where you are building.

I think for architect, builder, interior designer, lighting designer and landscape architect that it's important that they are familiar with the style you like. Most of those who say that they can do a broad range have an understanding a mile wide and inch deep and the result will reflect that. There are a gob of nuances in design that make a huge difference. The vast majority of people who become architects would have difficulty doing one or two styles well, much less multiple.

That said, for specific projects it can be valuable to do a bit of mix and match but that is only the case when you want, for instance, a modern twist on a traditional farmhouse.

Small to medium. Emphasis on small. Occasionally a larger firm will do a good job, such as SALA Architects in Minneapolis, but most medium and larger firms seem staffed with mediocre architects. There are also a lot of mediocre small firms though.

I would start with the architect, get a full set of plans and specs, put them out for bid to three of your favorite builders. If you start with a builder then they have little incentive to try to contain costs or increase value. Look at a lot of new homes and ask a lot of questions about the costs to build that house. Get a good idea of what the cost per sq ft is for what you want to build (style and level of finish). Add 20% to that and use that number to drive the size of house your architect designs.

You don't need to like your architect; he's a sub. Your builder, however, does.

I couldn't disagree more. Only in low-end poorly designed housing is the architect a sub. For a well designed house the architect is the most key group on the team.

If you've commissioned Frank Gehry to draw up a home, I agree. Put that thing up for bid and pick a builder. You've already said that you've got plenty of money to make your statement. Then there are the rest of us who need the efficiencies that are the fruit of tried and true relationships.

Let's say your plumber is a Trump supporting NRA member, but he kicks a$$ on the job. Do you care? Is he coming to the housewarming party? Probably not. You don't have to like everyone who works on your job, no matter their capacity. And the "architect as the star" mentality is particularly distasteful. it's a team effort.

IMO an architect that is familiar with all the rules in your area would be my first choice then a builder that works with that architect

My kinda architect ^.

This is great. I really appreciate your comments. @ Summit Studio Architects — so helpful! Thank you for your lengthy response.

Sarah, I truly appreciate your approach to this project. You're going about it just the right way. I have some articles on my website about how to choose a builder, how to choose an architect, preparing for a pre-design meeting and others you may find helpful.

Joseph Corlett, LLC The best compliment I ever got from a builder was "I don't like architects, but I do like you".

We chose a builder we felt compatible with first. He has built several homes in our budget range and a couple right near us so it felt like a fit. We also communicate well with him and he seems budget conscious so we appreciate that. He recommended designers and architects to us and we then reviewed from that list and selected one. In retrospect we should have met with more than one and should have asked more questions about the designers ability to design a home in our budget. We also should have asked how busy the design firm was to ensure our project would be given adequate time. While we are ultimately happy with the design the experience was not what we hoped for. Now that the design is done I’m glad we chose the builder first. Still love him and working with him and that relationship we be lasting far longer. Having the builder on deck from the get go did help keep design in check as he attended meetings with us and gage cost saving feedback often. Thankfully!