Hello everyone,
I hope I’m posting my questions in the right place.
The first question is whether we simply have to accept the increased costs for the foundation slab without consultation. At first, we were told that 40 cm (16 inches) of excavation would be needed. After the soil report, it was 70 cm (28 inches), and during excavation, it turned out to be 92 cm (36 inches)... all without prior notice. The whole foundation slab is now about 9,000 euros more expensive than initially quoted. What bothers us is that we were presented with a fait accompli.
Then there is the telecommunications provider. The road will have to be reopened for this connection, and of course, we are expected to pay for that as well. The basic connection also costs around 700 euros. The civil engineer who opens the road for the telecom provider invoices separately, and we don’t understand why all these tasks have to be done multiple times instead of being better coordinated.
The surveyor or the architect—we’re not quite sure—also made a mistake. Our house was planned 37 cm (14.5 inches) too low and now has to be set higher. This means we’ll have to bring in more soil in the garden to maintain the planned ground-level access to the terrace. Again, more costs that were not anticipated. Do we just have to accept this as well?
We checked with our local utilities about what applications are required to connect a new build to the supply network. They sent us applications for electricity and water, costing nearly 7,000 euros. Then, last week, we heard from several neighbors (in a complete new development) that the drainage work must be done by a subsidiary of the utilities. One neighboring property had to pay an extra 11,000 euros on top of the house connections for this—and the invoice came from the utilities, not the subsidiary. We feel quite taken advantage of. For us, this means about 8,500 euros more on top.
Do we just have to accept all of this, or what can we do? At the moment, we’re quite desperate, and the cost spiral keeps turning. We are not in a position to judge whether all this is justified or what’s still coming. We thought we had planned well. We even consulted various advisors and friends with building experience... but right now, we really feel lost, and more financing is looming.
Best regards
I hope I’m posting my questions in the right place.
The first question is whether we simply have to accept the increased costs for the foundation slab without consultation. At first, we were told that 40 cm (16 inches) of excavation would be needed. After the soil report, it was 70 cm (28 inches), and during excavation, it turned out to be 92 cm (36 inches)... all without prior notice. The whole foundation slab is now about 9,000 euros more expensive than initially quoted. What bothers us is that we were presented with a fait accompli.
Then there is the telecommunications provider. The road will have to be reopened for this connection, and of course, we are expected to pay for that as well. The basic connection also costs around 700 euros. The civil engineer who opens the road for the telecom provider invoices separately, and we don’t understand why all these tasks have to be done multiple times instead of being better coordinated.
The surveyor or the architect—we’re not quite sure—also made a mistake. Our house was planned 37 cm (14.5 inches) too low and now has to be set higher. This means we’ll have to bring in more soil in the garden to maintain the planned ground-level access to the terrace. Again, more costs that were not anticipated. Do we just have to accept this as well?
We checked with our local utilities about what applications are required to connect a new build to the supply network. They sent us applications for electricity and water, costing nearly 7,000 euros. Then, last week, we heard from several neighbors (in a complete new development) that the drainage work must be done by a subsidiary of the utilities. One neighboring property had to pay an extra 11,000 euros on top of the house connections for this—and the invoice came from the utilities, not the subsidiary. We feel quite taken advantage of. For us, this means about 8,500 euros more on top.
Do we just have to accept all of this, or what can we do? At the moment, we’re quite desperate, and the cost spiral keeps turning. We are not in a position to judge whether all this is justified or what’s still coming. We thought we had planned well. We even consulted various advisors and friends with building experience... but right now, we really feel lost, and more financing is looming.
Best regards
P
Peanuts7410 Jun 2016 13:01Almost €30,000 for earthworks without a basement is still quite an amount; we didn’t even spend that much when we had a basement...
Nonetheless, I thought that would be the extra cost for the excavation 50cm (20 inches) deeper...
Nonetheless, I thought that would be the extra cost for the excavation 50cm (20 inches) deeper...
What if the development plan allows for the building to be 37cm (15 inches) higher than usual? Typically, the foundation wall heights from a specific fixed reference point are quite precisely defined (in our case, 0 to 50cm (0 to 20 inches) above street level at a certain location).
The height of the foundation wall (or finished floor level of the ground floor) is set during the site layout process. The client decides what height they want within the allowed range. Ideally, the professionals present will explain the advantages and disadvantages and may offer advice on how to match the height with the neighboring property.
The excavation contractor must dig down until they find a suitable soil foundation that can support the building’s load (for example, natural soil). It does not matter at all how high the house will be built later. The higher the building is set in relation to the street, the more fill material will be required. However, this also means a higher risk of flooding during heavy rain.
The higher the building is placed, the less trouble there will be later with rainwater drainage. But the higher it is, the more expensive it gets. If there is a significant height difference compared to the neighbor’s property—for instance about 40cm (16 inches) or more—you may need expensive L-shaped retaining walls to mark the boundary, as basic concrete slabs or similar solutions will no longer be sufficient.
The height of the foundation wall (or finished floor level of the ground floor) is set during the site layout process. The client decides what height they want within the allowed range. Ideally, the professionals present will explain the advantages and disadvantages and may offer advice on how to match the height with the neighboring property.
The excavation contractor must dig down until they find a suitable soil foundation that can support the building’s load (for example, natural soil). It does not matter at all how high the house will be built later. The higher the building is set in relation to the street, the more fill material will be required. However, this also means a higher risk of flooding during heavy rain.
The higher the building is placed, the less trouble there will be later with rainwater drainage. But the higher it is, the more expensive it gets. If there is a significant height difference compared to the neighbor’s property—for instance about 40cm (16 inches) or more—you may need expensive L-shaped retaining walls to mark the boundary, as basic concrete slabs or similar solutions will no longer be sufficient.
P
Peanuts7410 Jun 2016 13:11Such differences in elevation are something many in the South can only dream of.
I would definitely make sure to be at least 15 - 20 cm (6 - 8 inches) above street level anyway, due to possible flooding.
I would definitely make sure to be at least 15 - 20 cm (6 - 8 inches) above street level anyway, due to possible flooding.
Payday schrieb:
What if the development plan allows for a full 37cm higher elevation? Normally, the base heights from a specific fixed reference point are quite precisely defined (in our case, between 0 and 50cm (0 and 20 inches) above street level at a specific location). Since nobody can yet determine the source of the 37cm discrepancy—whether an error or something else—this remains purely hypothetical. Standard specifications in development plans vary by region. If it’s technically necessary, it’s usually not a problem.
The height of the base (or finished ground floor) is determined during staking out. The client states their preferred height within the permitted range. If it was handled this way, that would obviously explain why 37cm are suddenly missing. If a client on-site requests something different from the approved building permit / planning permission, they sign it off there and then, and this is reflected in the staking plan.
More correctly, the building permit / planning permission should be followed—otherwise, setback distances might no longer comply.
The pros present usually explain the advantages and disadvantages and may offer advice on how to adjust the height relative to neighboring properties. Guesswork is unfortunately very unreliable here.
Best regards,
Dirk Grafe
The finished floor height of the ground floor (which is what this ultimately concerns) was determined during our on-site measurement appointment. The excavation contractor, the site manager, the surveyors, and we as the homeowners were present. The surveyor read out the development plan, explained the height at the measuring point (boundary marker), and indicated the range from which we could choose the height. Then we went to check the conditions of the neighboring plots and the street. Afterward, there was a brief discussion about which height would be best. We chose 35cm (14 inches) out of the allowed 50cm (20 inches), which is quite high and caused some additional costs due to the need for more gravel, etc.—but as a result, the entire property is noticeably higher than the surroundings.
The height was not part of the building notification. The only requirement was to comply with the heights set out in the development plan (0 to 50cm (0 to 20 inches) above street level). Due to the permitted ridge height of 10.5 meters (34 feet), a city villa almost 7 meters (23 feet) tall should not have any issues.
It may be different in other regions or states. For us, it was straightforward and uncomplicated. How should one know during the building notification which height will be best in the end? If the building is constructed too low (because it was indicated that way beforehand), water will enter during any heavy rain.
The height was not part of the building notification. The only requirement was to comply with the heights set out in the development plan (0 to 50cm (0 to 20 inches) above street level). Due to the permitted ridge height of 10.5 meters (34 feet), a city villa almost 7 meters (23 feet) tall should not have any issues.
It may be different in other regions or states. For us, it was straightforward and uncomplicated. How should one know during the building notification which height will be best in the end? If the building is constructed too low (because it was indicated that way beforehand), water will enter during any heavy rain.
Similar topics