Hello everyone,
We are building a KFW 55 house and plan to create two separate living units.
This means the ground floor and the upper floor will each form one unit. So, we would have a single-family house with a granny flat (or accessory apartment).
We recently had a meeting with the construction company, including the site manager... he made us quite uncertain because he said this would not be approved in the building permit / planning permission application as such.
Our understanding, as well as that of the bank, is as follows:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The definition of a granny flat (accessory apartment) is quite simple. It is considered a granny flat if
Independent household management must be possible
First of all, the rented space must actually be an apartment.
An apartment is an independent, spatially and economically separated living unit, where an independent household can be maintained without common use of other rooms in the house beyond the usual extent. This means the apartment must have, in addition to at least one room, a bathroom as well as cooking facilities.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
We have exactly these conditions on each floor with about 70cm (28 inches) per floor, each with a bathroom/WC, kitchen, and bedroom.
The only potential point open to interpretation might be where the separation is—whether we place a door on the upper floor to separate the units or under the stairs. But even without this door, fully independent household management would still be possible.
The reason we are doing this is fairly straightforward: later for our children as independent apartments or for a parent...
Now, regarding the site manager’s concerns... as far as I remember... soundproofing / escape routes / fire safety? Are these deal-breakers for a granny flat? What does soundproofing have to do with it? If anything, this should be a matter between me, as landlord, and the respective tenant, right?
The matter is now going to the architect for final clarification.
What experiences do you have? What else can we do to clarify this properly?
Best regards and have a nice evening.
We are building a KFW 55 house and plan to create two separate living units.
This means the ground floor and the upper floor will each form one unit. So, we would have a single-family house with a granny flat (or accessory apartment).
We recently had a meeting with the construction company, including the site manager... he made us quite uncertain because he said this would not be approved in the building permit / planning permission application as such.
Our understanding, as well as that of the bank, is as follows:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The definition of a granny flat (accessory apartment) is quite simple. It is considered a granny flat if
- the rented apartment is part of the building that you yourself live in,
- and is located within your home.
Independent household management must be possible
First of all, the rented space must actually be an apartment.
An apartment is an independent, spatially and economically separated living unit, where an independent household can be maintained without common use of other rooms in the house beyond the usual extent. This means the apartment must have, in addition to at least one room, a bathroom as well as cooking facilities.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
We have exactly these conditions on each floor with about 70cm (28 inches) per floor, each with a bathroom/WC, kitchen, and bedroom.
The only potential point open to interpretation might be where the separation is—whether we place a door on the upper floor to separate the units or under the stairs. But even without this door, fully independent household management would still be possible.
The reason we are doing this is fairly straightforward: later for our children as independent apartments or for a parent...
Now, regarding the site manager’s concerns... as far as I remember... soundproofing / escape routes / fire safety? Are these deal-breakers for a granny flat? What does soundproofing have to do with it? If anything, this should be a matter between me, as landlord, and the respective tenant, right?
The matter is now going to the architect for final clarification.
What experiences do you have? What else can we do to clarify this properly?
Best regards and have a nice evening.
T
toxicmolotof1 Mar 2017 08:00Alex85 schrieb:
Please keep your comments longer instead of simply accusing the original poster of a criminal offense. For you and the original poster only:
Please use the forum search function. This topic has been discussed thoroughly at least once a year over the past three years. The consistent conclusion is that planning solely as a two-family house or a single-family home with a rented unit is not sufficient.
The entire construction process—including fire protection, noise insulation if necessary, ventilation, electrical work, additional parking spaces, and everything else involved—must be executed exactly as planned. If even one door is missing (because “it can be installed later”), the requirements are not met. The costs for completing these elements will likely exceed the subsidy amount. However, a certificate of separability is not necessarily required.
I state this so firmly because every taxpayer contributes to these incorrect subsidies. So please don’t waste any thought on trying to “snag funding,” as was nicely put in another thread on this topic.
Thanks, you ended up going into more detail after all.
I don’t see any obstacles in your points. For example, the original poster explicitly named the door to be installed, and they hired both the planner and the contractor to build two residential units. The funding conditions also don’t contain any exclusions. So, the issue here basically boils down to a matter of ethics and is far from criminal law.
Have you considered that there are only construction-related requirements and no further checks, for example, whether an additional party actually moves in within a certain period, since that might be more economical for the funding program?
That’s why I find the suggestion to search the forum unsatisfactory, because all you find there is drama and moralizing. If you have a relevant, useful link within the forum, please feel free to share it.
I don’t see any obstacles in your points. For example, the original poster explicitly named the door to be installed, and they hired both the planner and the contractor to build two residential units. The funding conditions also don’t contain any exclusions. So, the issue here basically boils down to a matter of ethics and is far from criminal law.
Have you considered that there are only construction-related requirements and no further checks, for example, whether an additional party actually moves in within a certain period, since that might be more economical for the funding program?
That’s why I find the suggestion to search the forum unsatisfactory, because all you find there is drama and moralizing. If you have a relevant, useful link within the forum, please feel free to share it.
T
toxicmolotof1 Mar 2017 08:40Perhaps the construction manager’s issue is not with the funding itself, but simply that the zoning plan only allows for a single-family house with a secondary unit? Two residential units of 70m² (750 sq ft) each would be considered a two-family house, since a secondary unit usually* plays a subordinate role...
*no professional expertise here.
“As mentioned, we want to have the option later on to rent out this unit (preferably to family members) AND of course to use the relevant KfW subsidies. I think that’s all legitimate!!!?!?”
If both units are going to be used as separate residences, that is, of course, legitimate. This requires that independent household management is possible there (including kitchen connections, not just a kitchen).
From this, I read that currently (not later) the goal is simply to be able to access the funding.
To that I say: It’s not worth it, because if you start A, you have to follow through with B.
*no professional expertise here.
“As mentioned, we want to have the option later on to rent out this unit (preferably to family members) AND of course to use the relevant KfW subsidies. I think that’s all legitimate!!!?!?”
If both units are going to be used as separate residences, that is, of course, legitimate. This requires that independent household management is possible there (including kitchen connections, not just a kitchen).
From this, I read that currently (not later) the goal is simply to be able to access the funding.
To that I say: It’s not worth it, because if you start A, you have to follow through with B.
Similar topics