Hello Forum,
I have a question regarding the following situation. I ordered a city villa with a 30° (30-degree) roof pitch (hip roof) without a converted attic. Due to a drawing error, the roof pitch is now 25° (25-degree). All documents and structural calculations are based on 30°. Do you have any ideas on how to increase the usable volume? Would it be acceptable to compare this to a fully converted attic? I am skeptical about that, as I have already lost a lot of space due to the reduced pitch.
I have a question regarding the following situation. I ordered a city villa with a 30° (30-degree) roof pitch (hip roof) without a converted attic. Due to a drawing error, the roof pitch is now 25° (25-degree). All documents and structural calculations are based on 30°. Do you have any ideas on how to increase the usable volume? Would it be acceptable to compare this to a fully converted attic? I am skeptical about that, as I have already lost a lot of space due to the reduced pitch.
I assume we are talking about https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/entwurf-grundriss-eg-og-sowie-l-vordach-tipps.34963/ (?)
I’m having a hard time imagining this "drawing mistake." So you ordered a 30° roof pitch, it was designed and approved accordingly, but the roof was actually built with a 25° pitch?
With a 25° roof pitch, you only reach 1 m (3 feet 3 inches) height after 2.145 m (7 feet), and 2 m (6 feet 7 inches) standing height after 4.29 m (14 feet 1 inch); with a 30° pitch, these would have been 1.73 m (5 feet 8 inches) and 3.46 m (11 feet 4 inches), respectively. With a 10.30 m (33 feet 9 inches) side length, you now effectively have 36.12 m² (389 square feet) of floor area at or above 1 m (3 feet 3 inches) height and 2.95 m² (32 square feet) of floor area with 2 m (6 feet 7 inches) standing height, compared to 46.78 m² (504 square feet) and 11.42 m² (123 square feet).
Your question / headline "Comparison offer" makes me understand that you want to know what a fair "compensation" would be (?)
Using a rough estimate based on 1 m (3 feet 3 inches) high boxes (without subtracting the hatch each time), you have 39.07 m³ (1,379 cubic feet) of storage volume instead of 58.20 m³ (2,055 cubic feet), meaning you lose about 19.13 m³ (675 cubic feet) (please note this is just a rough, back-of-the-envelope calculation). That’s roughly 60% of the volume of a single garage (calculated with a comparable method). If the general contractor offers you a 3 x 3 m (10 x 10 feet) prefabricated garage/workshop annex free of charge, I would consider that a fair compensation for both sides for the lost storage space. Alternatively, a single garage with a manual up-and-over door at the price of a workshop annex would also be reasonable. Of course, the contractor should also cover any costs for correcting the permit.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
mondbau schrieb:
Due to a drawing mistake, the roof pitch is now 25°. All documents and structural calculations specify 30°.
I’m having a hard time imagining this "drawing mistake." So you ordered a 30° roof pitch, it was designed and approved accordingly, but the roof was actually built with a 25° pitch?
With a 25° roof pitch, you only reach 1 m (3 feet 3 inches) height after 2.145 m (7 feet), and 2 m (6 feet 7 inches) standing height after 4.29 m (14 feet 1 inch); with a 30° pitch, these would have been 1.73 m (5 feet 8 inches) and 3.46 m (11 feet 4 inches), respectively. With a 10.30 m (33 feet 9 inches) side length, you now effectively have 36.12 m² (389 square feet) of floor area at or above 1 m (3 feet 3 inches) height and 2.95 m² (32 square feet) of floor area with 2 m (6 feet 7 inches) standing height, compared to 46.78 m² (504 square feet) and 11.42 m² (123 square feet).
Your question / headline "Comparison offer" makes me understand that you want to know what a fair "compensation" would be (?)
Using a rough estimate based on 1 m (3 feet 3 inches) high boxes (without subtracting the hatch each time), you have 39.07 m³ (1,379 cubic feet) of storage volume instead of 58.20 m³ (2,055 cubic feet), meaning you lose about 19.13 m³ (675 cubic feet) (please note this is just a rough, back-of-the-envelope calculation). That’s roughly 60% of the volume of a single garage (calculated with a comparable method). If the general contractor offers you a 3 x 3 m (10 x 10 feet) prefabricated garage/workshop annex free of charge, I would consider that a fair compensation for both sides for the lost storage space. Alternatively, a single garage with a manual up-and-over door at the price of a workshop annex would also be reasonable. Of course, the contractor should also cover any costs for correcting the permit.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
The drawing error originated from the drafting office. A 30° pitch was specified, but 25° was drawn. The structural calculation, the building permit / planning permission, and the contract all state 30°. I am not sure about the general cost of an attic conversion; typically, it involves insulation wool and foil, a rafter sheathing, and tongue-and-groove boarding. This issue is quite frustrating to me. Is it reasonable to carry out repairs? Setting up scaffolding, removing all roof tiles completely, taking down solar collectors, replacing the rafters, and then reinstalling the roofing.
Is a 25° roof pitch even allowed? We have a hipped roof with a 25° pitch, which is fine for a storage room, but it doesn’t really allow for more than one room with somewhat limited usability.
If 30° was intended, I wouldn’t agree to that change, although I don’t find a 30° roof pitch on a pyramid roof visually appealing.
If 30° was intended, I wouldn’t agree to that change, although I don’t find a 30° roof pitch on a pyramid roof visually appealing.
Why has no one ever asked why the angles don’t match? At the latest, the carpenter should have asked which one applies. In my opinion, the labeling takes priority. I wouldn’t measure it myself either, unless I had an advantage. Here, the carpenter has that advantage. Apparently, you were deliberately not asked.
H
hampshire2 Mar 2021 08:48This is very frustrating.
If the construction differs from what was structurally calculated and approved (both 30°), it must be corrected. Your loss in this case would be a delay.
If only 25° was approved and also built, there are several possible courses of action – I don’t immediately know which one I would choose myself. It is important here to clarify your own goals. My goal would be to get the 30°. Another goal could be to obtain the highest possible financial compensation. When negotiating the latter, I would prepare by calculating different approaches for the initial claim, for example: What would it cost to reconstruct the roof at 30 degrees, or how many square meters (square feet) am I losing and multiply that by the price per square meter (square foot) of the house, or... In your argument, you should choose the approach that results in the highest claim. Since there will be a negotiation anyway, the starting point needs to be right.
Maybe your contractor has a good solution and nothing will be disputed. At least I hope that for you.
If the construction differs from what was structurally calculated and approved (both 30°), it must be corrected. Your loss in this case would be a delay.
If only 25° was approved and also built, there are several possible courses of action – I don’t immediately know which one I would choose myself. It is important here to clarify your own goals. My goal would be to get the 30°. Another goal could be to obtain the highest possible financial compensation. When negotiating the latter, I would prepare by calculating different approaches for the initial claim, for example: What would it cost to reconstruct the roof at 30 degrees, or how many square meters (square feet) am I losing and multiply that by the price per square meter (square foot) of the house, or... In your argument, you should choose the approach that results in the highest claim. Since there will be a negotiation anyway, the starting point needs to be right.
Maybe your contractor has a good solution and nothing will be disputed. At least I hope that for you.
Similar topics