ᐅ Building Permit: Red Dot vs. Notification Procedure: Green Dot

Hello everyone,

I recently purchased a plot in a new development area and am planning to submit a building permit application soon (the architect). In our area, the notification procedure is possible.

However, I have an architect who will only handle phases 1-5 of the service stages and then step back (project leader is a friend). My concern is that if I apply for the simplified procedure, there might be disagreements later on, and the architect will no longer be involved, which could lead to problems for me.

Although I know the simplified procedure is cheaper and much faster, I am considering going for the full standard building permit process instead.

How would you handle a situation like this?
I would appreciate any advice and tips.

Unfortunately, I couldn’t find any information on this topic.

Thanks in advance for your efforts and suggestions.

Best regards

In my opinion, your concerns are only justified if the architect is uninsured and planning to emigrate soon. If they have accepted responsibility through the notification procedure, they are liable for their planning.
What kind of discrepancies are you worried about?

Escroda schrieb:

In my opinion, your concerns are only valid if the architect is not insured and is planning to emigrate soon. If they have accepted responsibility as part of the notification procedure, then they are liable for their planning.
What inconsistencies are you worried about?

Hello,

my worry is taking on extra risk.

In such a case, if something doesn’t match, I would have to deal with it extensively.

With the red dot (Rotpunkt), if I understand correctly, the authority already flags any “no-go” issues during the process, so I don’t have major or critical discussions later on, right?

Best regards

Serdar88 schrieb:

taking on an additional risk

It is correct that both the designer and the client are responsible for complying with all regulations. The trained professional naturally carries by far the greatest share of this responsibility. If the professional is no longer available, then of course you have to take over. In the case of a beginner or a brilliant designer who is, however, a poor regulations expert, your risk does increase, but it is in the architect’s own interest to plan properly. Also, a single-family house in a development plan area is not that complicated.

Serdar88 schrieb:

Regarding the red dot process, if I understand correctly, the authority already indicates any "no-go" points during the procedure, so I won’t have major or critical discussions later.. =? or?

Yes, but the review effort in the simplified procedure is quite limited. Of course, someone else takes another look, and during the notification procedure usually someone else reviews it as well—though without obligation or liability. Whether the effort is worth it depends on your trust in the planner, the development plan, and the authority.
In any case, your consideration has nothing to do with only phases 1-5 of the service being taken on. Whether under §51 or §52, your designer owes you a regulation-compliant design and is liable for it.

Escroda schrieb:

And a single-family house in a designated development area is not overly complicated.

In the specific case of fully utilizing the building window defined by a quarter-circle line, I do see some risks, but more related to the site surveying than to the planning phase. I linked you the example from @Oakland in the other thread – if I remember correctly, there were issues caused by inaccuracies in elevation measurements.

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/