Hello!
For almost two years now, I have been considering having a small pavilion in our garden converted internally and rented out as an apartment to a student or similar, in order to partially cover the maintenance costs of the property. The biggest question for me is how to carry out such a project in a financially viable way. I have already spoken with two architects who have very different estimates for the total cost (70,000 and 120,000). I also spoke with a small construction company that could handle the entire interior conversion (cost estimate around 50,000, but excluding architectural services).
The dilemma I’m facing is that I need an architect for the change of use application (the pavilion is currently not registered as living space but as a garden shed; the garden area is also classified as open land) as well as for the preliminary building inquiry (the pavilion’s exterior is protected as a historic monument, but a window is to be installed). The architect would of course oversee the entire construction, which would increase the costs. On the other hand, the renovation work could also be carried out independently by the construction company mentioned (likely at a significantly lower price). One of the architects said that due to the relatively minor modifications, hiring an architect might hardly be worthwhile.
To give a clearer picture, here are some key facts about the pavilion and the planned work.
Key data:
- Floor area 18m² (194 sq ft), the attic is also to be converted (about another 12m² (129 sq ft) of space)
- Connected to electricity, gas, water supply and drainage
- Exterior protected as a historic monument
- Located in an open land area
- Immediately adjacent to the road or property boundary
- Parking space installation possible
Planned work:
- Installation of bathroom and kitchenette
- Conversion of the attic as a second living level (for a bed)
- Installation of an additional window
- Installation of a heating system (gas boiler)
- Insulation (planned exemption from energy saving regulations due to disproportionately high costs)
My question is, which option would be the most cost-effective? For example, does it make sense to hire an architect only to handle all the formalities, and then, once the building permit / planning permission is approved, switch to a construction company and leave the architect out?
I look forward to any input!
Best regards, Tom
For almost two years now, I have been considering having a small pavilion in our garden converted internally and rented out as an apartment to a student or similar, in order to partially cover the maintenance costs of the property. The biggest question for me is how to carry out such a project in a financially viable way. I have already spoken with two architects who have very different estimates for the total cost (70,000 and 120,000). I also spoke with a small construction company that could handle the entire interior conversion (cost estimate around 50,000, but excluding architectural services).
The dilemma I’m facing is that I need an architect for the change of use application (the pavilion is currently not registered as living space but as a garden shed; the garden area is also classified as open land) as well as for the preliminary building inquiry (the pavilion’s exterior is protected as a historic monument, but a window is to be installed). The architect would of course oversee the entire construction, which would increase the costs. On the other hand, the renovation work could also be carried out independently by the construction company mentioned (likely at a significantly lower price). One of the architects said that due to the relatively minor modifications, hiring an architect might hardly be worthwhile.
To give a clearer picture, here are some key facts about the pavilion and the planned work.
Key data:
- Floor area 18m² (194 sq ft), the attic is also to be converted (about another 12m² (129 sq ft) of space)
- Connected to electricity, gas, water supply and drainage
- Exterior protected as a historic monument
- Located in an open land area
- Immediately adjacent to the road or property boundary
- Parking space installation possible
Planned work:
- Installation of bathroom and kitchenette
- Conversion of the attic as a second living level (for a bed)
- Installation of an additional window
- Installation of a heating system (gas boiler)
- Insulation (planned exemption from energy saving regulations due to disproportionately high costs)
My question is, which option would be the most cost-effective? For example, does it make sense to hire an architect only to handle all the formalities, and then, once the building permit / planning permission is approved, switch to a construction company and leave the architect out?
I look forward to any input!
Best regards, Tom
Tomtom1984 schrieb:
What do you mean by that? No worries, by "energetic" we don’t mean conspiracy theories here, but the 2016 energy saving ordinance :-)
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
T
Tomtom19847 Nov 2018 20:56Mottenhausen schrieb:
Of course. If the permit is not granted, your architect’s work ends precisely at that point. It just has to be clear beforehand what you are commissioning them for and how they will be compensated.Is there any legal obligation to carry out the measures agreed upon in the preliminary building inquiry/building permit application with an architect? For example, the window, which changes the external appearance—does it have to be installed under the supervision of an architect, or can a tradesperson carry this out independently?
The architect also mentioned that it might make more sense to submit a full building permit application rather than just a preliminary inquiry, because with a listed building, a preliminary inquiry often does not suffice for a decision, and then documents equivalent to a full building permit are required. In this context, he referred to submitting plans (including interior layouts). I am wondering, however, since only the exterior is protected and only a new window is to be installed, why would a preliminary inquiry or building permit also require interior design plans? Could this possibly be related to the planned change of use to residential space, where such plans might be requested as part of that process?
T
Tomtom19847 Nov 2018 20:5711ant schrieb:
Don’t worry, “energetic” here doesn’t mean conspiracy theories, but refers to the Energy Saving Ordinance 2016 🙂 Ah, okay. Yes, the whole thing would still need to be insulated, that’s true. The current insulation is insufficient...
N
nordanney8 Nov 2018 07:26Tomtom1984 schrieb:
Now I’m wondering, since only the exterior is protected and here they just want to install a new window Just?
If it’s a listed building, that "just" is actually a very, very, very high hurdle. Most heritage authorities won’t agree to it.
Tomtom1984 schrieb:
Is there any legal requirement to carry out the agreed-upon measures in the preliminary building inquiry/building permit application with an architect? No. According to §42 (3) of the State Building Code Baden-Württemberg, you will need to appoint a site manager who must coordinate all trades. If you have each trade work carried out by a different company, the architect is naturally a good option for this role.
Tomtom1984 schrieb:
The architect also mentioned that it would make more sense to submit a building permit application directly instead of a preliminary building inquiry I agree. A preliminary building inquiry usually only covers the planning law permissibility. You can avoid the costly building documents required for building regulations approval and their review if the project is already inadmissible from an urban planning perspective. Since you are planning a non-privileged development in an outer area, in my opinion you can only refer to §35 (4) 4. of the Federal Building Code
the alteration or change of use of worthy-of-preservation buildings that characterize the cultural landscape, even if they are abandoned, provided the project serves a practical use of the buildings and preserves their design value,
To prove this, detailed construction drawings and close coordination with the heritage authority are necessary. For a start, I would be satisfied with an oral, obviously non-binding, statement from the building authority confirming that the project is not fundamentally excluded.
Tomtom1984 schrieb:
Now I wonder why such a preliminary building inquiry or building permit application also requires interior design plans. Because you are basically planning a complete residential building, very small, but with all the trades involved in a single-family house. Moreover, it is a listed building, which probably only makes the change of use possible in the first place.
P.S.: In my opinion, the focus of your posts is too much on the financial aspects. Your project seems more like a labor of love than a money-making venture. Keep in mind that an unmotivated (because underpaid) master mason can ruin both.
ypg schrieb:
Anyway. It’s not really worth it from an energy standpoint, right?Tomtom1984 schrieb:
What do you mean by that?11ant schrieb:
Don’t worry, “energy standpoint” here doesn’t mean conspiracy theories, but the 2016 Energy Saving Ordinance 🙂 Exactly, compliant with the Energy Saving Ordinance.
A listed pavilion... in my opinion, the whole effort isn’t really worth it. Insulating walls, insulating the slab foundation, insulating the roof. It also has windows. Then hot water, toilet wastewater, etc... this is a project for enthusiasts.
Why not share a photo? 🙂
Similar topics