ᐅ Floor plan design shortly before submitting the building permit application
Created on: 2 Oct 2017 23:25
R
R.Hotzenplotz
Hello everyone!
As some users have requested before, I’m now starting a new thread with the current planning of our detached house, which is about to be finalized.
These are the preliminary drawings for the building permit / planning permission application, and I have one last chance to review them and point out any issues.
It still seems to me that there is less than 1.20m (4 feet) of space between the two wardrobes in the dressing room. Or am I seeing this wrong? Apparently, the rooms on the left and right were overlooked and not adjusted accordingly.
Two Velux ceiling spotlights are still planned to illuminate the upper floor hallway.
In the basement, on the right side in the upper room, a window similar to the one on the left basement side is an option.
We still haven’t decided on the T30 fire-rated door to the garage, even though it is shown in the plans. Most likely, for safety reasons and the limited use of the kitchen at the other end of the house, we will eventually forgo it.
User 11ant pointed out that the right window in child’s room 2 is suboptimally positioned. However, this could still be changed after submitting the building permit / planning permission application. Our architect thinks moving the window to the left would negatively affect the house’s exterior appearance. We’ll have to see about that.
As some users have requested before, I’m now starting a new thread with the current planning of our detached house, which is about to be finalized.
These are the preliminary drawings for the building permit / planning permission application, and I have one last chance to review them and point out any issues.
It still seems to me that there is less than 1.20m (4 feet) of space between the two wardrobes in the dressing room. Or am I seeing this wrong? Apparently, the rooms on the left and right were overlooked and not adjusted accordingly.
Two Velux ceiling spotlights are still planned to illuminate the upper floor hallway.
In the basement, on the right side in the upper room, a window similar to the one on the left basement side is an option.
We still haven’t decided on the T30 fire-rated door to the garage, even though it is shown in the plans. Most likely, for safety reasons and the limited use of the kitchen at the other end of the house, we will eventually forgo it.
User 11ant pointed out that the right window in child’s room 2 is suboptimally positioned. However, this could still be changed after submitting the building permit / planning permission application. Our architect thinks moving the window to the left would negatively affect the house’s exterior appearance. We’ll have to see about that.
R
R.Hotzenplotz26 Jul 2018 07:18kaho674 schrieb:
Just a quick question:
Why is the rough opening dimension for the uneven patio doors no longer changeable?No one is saying it can’t be changed anymore. The problem we’re facing is one of cost and responsibility. Today, I was shown what the whole thing would cost (in the five-figure range). The general contractor (GC) refuses any cost sharing. They completely ignore the lawyer’s comments about construction defects, open contract interpretations, and planning errors, pretending these statements don’t exist. They also don’t try to refute these points.
The only thing that is technically no longer easily possible is widening the elements (which I would have preferred for the bedroom). However, it is still possible to achieve a threshold-free solution by redesigning the terrace structure, as well as a clear passage width of about 201cm (79 inches) — which is the passage dimension the lawyer requested based on the contract.
It’s unfortunate that no one is willing to compromise here. My last proposal as a compromise was that they cover the cost of the old windows and their removal, and I would pay for everything that comes next. But they refused and say the windows are just scrap.
There are basically only two options:
Either pay the money and avoid all further conflicts,
or
Postpone the issue until final inspection and then resolve it purely based on cost, while leaving the execution as it is.
kaho674 schrieb:
About the kitchen: Have you shown the kitchen planner the necessary boxing in? I could imagine they might conceal it much more elegantly than the GC’s drywall installer.No, I haven’t. The kitchen installer wants to come only after the plastering is done, then take measurements, and only then review everything again at the kitchen studio.
R
R.Hotzenplotz26 Jul 2018 07:46Curly schrieb:
I don’t understand why the general contractor should cover the cost of changing this now, or did I misunderstand?This is a contractual and legal issue. The contract guarantees patio exit doors with a height of 201cm (79 inches) and a threshold of 15cm (6 inches). According to the expert and the lawyer, a clear passage height of 201cm (79 inches) can therefore be expected, because while other dimensions refer to rough structural measurements, this is explicitly not the case for the patio doors. The threshold of 15cm (6 inches) is also not met according to the expert; it currently measures around 37cm (15 inches), including 16cm (6 inches) of screed plus parquet flooring. Thus, it does not add up to the agreed 15cm (6 inches).
Furthermore, the expert and lawyer suspect a planning error, since it is unlikely that such a small door would be designed for a house like this, especially when a non-expert commissioning party could not predict the expected glass area or clear passage dimensions. The lawyer stated that there should have been an explicit notice that all heights inside the house were raised (front door, interior doors, floor-to-ceiling heights), while simultaneously a patio door with below-average dimensions was planned.
Putting aside who ultimately has to pay for it, it’s clear that the doors need to be removed because they are terrible and would annoy you every day. So, go for maximum widening and lowering of the threshold—install new doors and then assess how the damage is distributed afterward. The windows are junk, that’s certain. But complaining endlessly won’t help. Get rid of them and move on.
If the soffit in the kitchen is no deeper than 70cm (28 inches), I would plan a tall cabinet in the corner and have it flush with the veneer of the kitchen cabinets on the right side. With a depth of up to 70cm (28 inches), you could also design an oversized countertop and bring the cabinets forward or opt for deeper units, which is often advantageous. So, in my opinion, it’s important to keep the soffit as shallow as possible.
If the soffit in the kitchen is no deeper than 70cm (28 inches), I would plan a tall cabinet in the corner and have it flush with the veneer of the kitchen cabinets on the right side. With a depth of up to 70cm (28 inches), you could also design an oversized countertop and bring the cabinets forward or opt for deeper units, which is often advantageous. So, in my opinion, it’s important to keep the soffit as shallow as possible.
R
R.Hotzenplotz26 Jul 2018 08:17kaho674 schrieb:
Accordingly, maximum widening and lowering of the threshold – new doors and then see how the damage is distributed.That’s not how it works legally! If they send me a price quote now and I say “please proceed,” I can’t later come back and question how the costs are divided. That’s not legally possible. I would agree with such a solution, but the general contractor won’t go for it. They will only proceed if I confirm the cost coverage.
Also, the elements can no longer be widened (or only with an effort that, according to their own expert, would be unjustifiable). Widening would have been even more important to me than raising because, in my opinion, it lets in more light and simply looks better than those small Mickey Mouse elements.
kaho674 schrieb:
But endlessly complaining afterwards doesn’t help. Get it done and move on.That’s not what I’m doing. I’m waiting to see what they offer, and then I’ll coordinate with the lawyer. Legally, I suspect it’s better to just let them proceed now if they aren’t open to a compromise solution, and then handle the whole issue at the final inspection. By then, it will mainly be about financial matters, but that’s just how it is. They said about 17cm (7 inches) in height would still be possible – combined with a threshold-free solution, which in turn requires additional costs for a different terrace construction.
I don’t know how tight the budget is. But if I have the choice between making it work the way I want with an extra 10,000 or getting 2,000 reimbursed by the general contractor, I’d rather go with the extra cost. At least I’d prefer that over selling the whole house because of it.
Similar topics