I think it depends on how specific your vision is for the house, and how well that matches up with relatively common layouts. If you can find stuff you like off-the-peg, it may make the most sense to approach builders first, talk with them generally about what you want, and then take their direction on where to go from there - maybe they have an off-the-shelf plan that can be modified.

If you have real specific requirements for the floorplan OR for the site - specific views you want to take in, a significant slope, specific views you want to avoid, etc., it may be worth starting with an architect.

Also consider design-build firms, if you haven't already, since they may be able to walk you through how much "architecture" you need.

Our project involves a site with some really specific views and elevations, so we went with a design-build firm led by an architect.

99% of plans are just bad. If you can tell a good one from a bad one, go for it. If you understand the basics of good home design, go for it. If you have no special needs and don't need to change a plan you find online, go for it.

Otherwise, the difference is an architect will give you what you didn't even realize you wanted and need and most will be there for help and advice if issues come up during your build. If you don't have an architect working with you during the build, then you most likely need to hire an inspector who will have your interest in mind for when things go wrong.

Start with the site, if you have one, and the builder you want to work with in the area of your site. That will narrow down the choices. They can help with plans. Or if your site is tricky, look for the architect first and ask who they like to build with.

I have a large family and have 2 siblings who have built in communities with builder plans, one that had the plan highly customized and one that selected a plan that was suited to their needs with only two changes - enlarging the garage and basement, my one brother used an architect to design his home and my one sister bought a plan off the internet and worked with her builder to tweak the design. My parents used an architect to design the home we grew up in, and I bought a pre-owned home. We are all happy with the homes we have. I don't know that there is a right or wrong answer.

My parent's home was built on steep hillside on a 2 acre corner lot. The home was also customized for a large family with 6 children (3 girls, 3 boys). I am not sure many stock plans would have fit the terrain or the unique needs of the family.

Of the homes I believe my brother's architect designed home is probably the least functional and least inspired design. It is a typical 2 bathroom, 3 bedroom ranch home, walk into the living room, dining room straight ahead, kitchen to the right, hallway to the left that leads to the bedrooms and bathrooms. The kitchen is large, but not well designed.

My sister's home that was built from the plan she found on the internet is quite unique and functions beautifully.

I think the biggest difference wasn't in how the plans were developed, but how well the owners defined their needs. My brother and his wife were young, had only lived in one other home that they rented from my parents before they built their home. They hadn't had any children yet and I don't think they had the life experience to know what would work best. My sister had owned 2 other homes and her children were grown. She knew exactly how her family functions, what worked and didn't work in previous homes and had taken a lot of time looking at homes and planning out everything that she wanted.

The other two homes both function well as does my pre-owned home. Again, these were all purchased as second/third homes and we knew what we needed for the house to function well based on how we live in our homes.

Jennifer's point is a good one - defining wants and needs is a HUGE issue. It's a lot easier for a builder or architect to say "no" to things than it is for them to guess at whether you may want to put a workshop in your garage or if you're an audiophile who needs a quiet listening room, etc. For example, we ended up putting together a multi-page list of home design goals when we started our process, and it helped show our architect/builder what we were after.

I may be partial (I am partial) but I think you would have a better success in getting a home that meets your needs and fits your site by having one designed with a local architect, rather than trying to find a design that was designed for someone else (or no one) for a different site (or no site at all). I often see people proverbially buying a Chevy to get a Porsche. Partial or not, its good advice.

Get the arch

The house, the site, you....

it's a marriage.. For better or worse .

Would you marry an online stranger?

There ya go:)

Internet house plans seem attractive at about 10% of the cost of custom plans. Unfortunately they aren't ready to build from, especially if you have a unique site. You'll need structural engineering, soils engineering, foundation design, well and septic design, grading and drainage plans and any modifications to make the home fit your site or your needs.

Familiarize yourself with the costs of everything you need to make the best value judgment for your new home.

When was ala carte ever cheaper??? Even McDonalds valuei is better if you toss half out the car window. LOL

I read that "open" floor plans are a thing of the past now. I am interested in the new design trend.

False. Regardless, you shouldn't build a house based upon trends. The house will outlast any trends.

Start with the site

Absolutely true.

I think the biggest difference wasn't in how the plans were developed, but how well the owners defined their needs.

This makes a lot of sense. Don't get caught up in countertops, French doors, or pictures of mudrooms just yet -- start with a well-discussed list of what rooms you need /how you need each one to function.

To back up what Jennifer is saying, I grew up in a farmhouse that my grandmother designed on graph paper. My family's lived in that house for almost 100 years now, and the plan still works well. It's really well designed: it has some of the best flow I've ever seen, the main rooms face south and east, and every room has windows. The one thing that's a problem is the small closets, but that was the way things were around 1925 when she and my Poppy built the house.

I agree with getting the contractor first...let them guide you on the most practical choices toward getting the home you want...

Hire an architect, then get a contractor. This is expensive what you’re doing and you want it done right

Get the architect first

There is a possibility that working with an architect you could end up saving money because s/he could come up with a perfect solution for YOUR needs that would be less square footage than the standard plans. Another question is whether you want something totally unique or if you are more than happy with off the shelf.