ᐅ Mark the airspace – build directly enclosed (approximately 6–7 m²)?
Created on: 23 Aug 2025 22:41
D
dereks123
Hello everyone,
In our new build, the living area is calculated quite tightly. My architect said it’s not a problem to include an open space (about 6–7 m² (65–75 sq ft)) in the building permit / planning permission application to meet the required living area, and then actually build it as a fully closed space. He said this is common practice and usually not checked. It’s a new development area.
I’m interested in:
In our new build, the living area is calculated quite tightly. My architect said it’s not a problem to include an open space (about 6–7 m² (65–75 sq ft)) in the building permit / planning permission application to meet the required living area, and then actually build it as a fully closed space. He said this is common practice and usually not checked. It’s a new development area.
I’m interested in:
- Is this really common?
- Has anyone had experience with this (final inspection, later sale, insurance, etc.)?
D
dereks12323 Aug 2025 23:33Sorry, an upper floor that is not counted as a full storey.
dereks123 schrieb:
Sorry, an upper floor that is not counted as a full storey So, a full storey that actually is one but is counted as less. A city villa where none is desired.
What the architect is suggesting is dishonest. Whether you tolerate it? Whether a forum gives you the go-ahead? Ultimately, you have to build exactly how it is ideally not wanted.
M
maulwurf7924 Aug 2025 07:29This is probably about calculating the upper floor as 25% smaller than the ground floor so that it counts as a recessed story rather than a full floor.
I’m just wondering how your architect plans to achieve that 7 sqm (75 sq ft) of open space. Most likely, the ground floor is larger than the upper floor, but not quite enough yet?
Your architect is right that the interior isn’t checked.
Another trick to build larger at a lower cost is to report the shell construction as complete to the building authority before the exterior insulation and facade are installed. The house is then measured this way and the external dimensions meet the authority’s requirements. The insulation and facade are added afterwards.
Fortune favors the brave! Unfortunately, there are way too many skeptics and scaredy-cats in Germany.
I’m just wondering how your architect plans to achieve that 7 sqm (75 sq ft) of open space. Most likely, the ground floor is larger than the upper floor, but not quite enough yet?
Your architect is right that the interior isn’t checked.
Another trick to build larger at a lower cost is to report the shell construction as complete to the building authority before the exterior insulation and facade are installed. The house is then measured this way and the external dimensions meet the authority’s requirements. The insulation and facade are added afterwards.
Fortune favors the brave! Unfortunately, there are way too many skeptics and scaredy-cats in Germany.
nordanney schrieb:
Many people also run red lights.This comparison inspires me: running a red light results in penalty points on your driving record. Perhaps architects who encourage illegal building should have their approval rights suspended for a few months, similar to how a driver’s license is revoked for drunk driving.https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
T
Teimo198824 Aug 2025 11:18You have to decide for yourself. I wouldn’t ask that in a forum. It would be like if our Chancellor asked in a forum whether it’s acceptable to break a central election promise two days after the vote using previous majorities.
You know it’s against the rules and that you most likely won’t face any consequences for violating them. The decision is yours.
You know it’s against the rules and that you most likely won’t face any consequences for violating them. The decision is yours.
maulwurf79 schrieb:
Unfortunately, there are far too many worrywarts and cowards in Germany. Well, the true meaning of "courage" certainly lies elsewhere than in circumventing existing laws (which were created for the benefit of our community). Calling someone who follows regulations a worrywart or coward seems a bit off to me. Where you really ought to be courageous and it benefits society, you unfortunately find this much less often, so the comparison is quite misleading.
Furthermore, it occurs to me that an architect who is unable to design a suitable and attractive house within the existing rules and without breaking regulations should perhaps focus more on their own shortcomings instead of looking for any possible illegal loophole to cover up their lack of creativity. In that respect, that wouldn’t be for me...
Similar topics