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.Hotzenplotz27 Sep 2018 19:11haydee schrieb:
There are standards and manufacturers' processing instructions.
You either follow them or you don’t.
If not, corrections must be made.
Our guy gave very clear instructions. No maybe, if, would have, could have, I don’t know.That’s exactly how ours handled it as well. Traumfaenger can certainly confirm how he works. But if the general contractor (GC) doesn’t cooperate, they’ll just hit a brick wall!
He must fix it, yes! And if he doesn’t?
haydee schrieb:
What happens if construction is stopped?It’s quite possible that you’ll keep paying your loan installments and rent for your apartment for another year. Plus, there’s still the chance that in the end it will only be settled through a compromise and you might be left covering costs.
haydee schrieb:
Who doesn’t get paid but still has to cover wages and suppliers?That is managed through a payment schedule, so the GC doesn’t have to advance large amounts. It’s not like this would push a GC who builds about 30 houses a year into financial trouble. They have plenty of projects running simultaneously, and none of their subcontractors are ever idle. The two site managers basically have to compete over which subcontractor gets assigned where first. One site manager oversees six houses at the same time.
Your concerns don’t really apply to our situation.
Haydee, you are out of touch with practical experience. I have to agree with the critic; there is no way to take action. The construction halt only really hurts one person, and it is certainly not the general contractor.
And the whole lawyer situation. Being right and actually winning are two different things. And a lousy settlement after three years doesn’t help either.
And the whole lawyer situation. Being right and actually winning are two different things. And a lousy settlement after three years doesn’t help either.
Accepting everything and paying without question when you call that practical?
There is not only black and white; there is much more in between.
The general contractor has no interest in a lawsuit or settlement. It doesn’t jeopardize his position, but no money initially hurts. A lawsuit also has an uncertain outcome for him and incurs costs.
There is not only black and white; there is much more in between.
The general contractor has no interest in a lawsuit or settlement. It doesn’t jeopardize his position, but no money initially hurts. A lawsuit also has an uncertain outcome for him and incurs costs.
R
R.Hotzenplotz27 Sep 2018 20:36haydee schrieb:
Accept everything and pay quietly if you call that practical?Payment is made once the options have been legally reviewed. What does accepting everything have to do with it? If you stop paying, construction will also stop, which in turn costs us an extra €1,800 per month (about $2,000) in rent. You can figure out where that goes month after month. Not to mention potential claims for damages from the general contractor due to delays caused by our own actions in case of losing the dispute.
haydee schrieb:
It doesn’t put him at risk, but no money initially hurts.So you mean if he has, say, a 10% profit margin on this project, he would willingly agree to everything he can avoid just to get his money faster? That’s unrealistic!
haydee schrieb:
A lawsuit also has an uncertain outcome and incurs costs for himYou need a solid basis for a lawsuit in the first place. And as I showed before with the example of the vapor barrier, he owes a rating of 1.5. You can write all you want here that most houses are 0.6 or whatever. That doesn’t matter at all! What exactly would you even sue about? We have contractually agreed to no better value than 1.5. So that should settle the matter. This is purely about the rating, regardless of whatever comes out regarding the accusation of improper workmanship with different adhesive tapes etc.
haydee schrieb:
It’s not just black and white, there’s a lot in between.Especially in construction, I actually think it often is! An exception would be clauses that require interpretation. Otherwise, what is owed is either fixed contractually or in applicable standards. Incidentally, the general contractor does not owe a dry basement per se, but simply a basement – for those who think the general contractor has to pay for drying equipment.
haydee schrieb:
I am beginning to understand why our expert can assert himself so well without letters and documentation and is highly valued by both tradespeople and homeowners. He was so knowledgeable about everything and could talk to everyone on an equal footing, immediately explaining what the solutions were.In my opinion, it is generally helpful when an expert can physically demonstrate to the contractors how things should be done when they are unsure. Once the communication shifts to written form, it becomes difficult to return to a solution-focused level.https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Even if it might not help Räuber here:
This construction is a prime example of why building a house with an architect and separate tenders for each trade is more flexible and often more sensible than working with a general contractor (GC).
The GC simply goes through their scope of work / contract step by step, doesn’t deviate from it at all, and charges extra for any changes.
With individual contracts for each trade, if the workmanship is poor, for example, you can involve the architect to review and discuss the issues with the contractor, or withhold payments from the tradespeople until the defects are corrected, and so on.
A GC really only makes sense for a standard house without extras, which the GC builds “off the shelf.” They are experienced with that and are less likely to make mistakes.
But unfortunately, with a GC, there is usually no option to “control” the quality by withholding payments. With trades contracted individually, you can withhold the entire amount if work is substandard.
I believe that in Räuber’s case, many defects are only coming to light because he is following up so thoroughly.
Otherwise, many defects would probably go unnoticed, as without constant supervision no one would be aware of them or they might even be covered up by the GC.
I have also noticed similar experiences from some acquaintances currently going through the same issues as Räuber.
It really pains me to read how home builders are treated in situations like this.
I hope for you that things will turn out well in the end.
Although I can only imagine that any compensation will be limited, since the defects usually date back too far to be “reasonably” fixed after the house is completed.
It’s somewhat like the diesel emissions scandal in the automotive industry. There, too, you only get small compensation, even though deception was obvious and you end up bearing the costs yourself afterward.
This construction is a prime example of why building a house with an architect and separate tenders for each trade is more flexible and often more sensible than working with a general contractor (GC).
The GC simply goes through their scope of work / contract step by step, doesn’t deviate from it at all, and charges extra for any changes.
With individual contracts for each trade, if the workmanship is poor, for example, you can involve the architect to review and discuss the issues with the contractor, or withhold payments from the tradespeople until the defects are corrected, and so on.
A GC really only makes sense for a standard house without extras, which the GC builds “off the shelf.” They are experienced with that and are less likely to make mistakes.
But unfortunately, with a GC, there is usually no option to “control” the quality by withholding payments. With trades contracted individually, you can withhold the entire amount if work is substandard.
I believe that in Räuber’s case, many defects are only coming to light because he is following up so thoroughly.
Otherwise, many defects would probably go unnoticed, as without constant supervision no one would be aware of them or they might even be covered up by the GC.
I have also noticed similar experiences from some acquaintances currently going through the same issues as Räuber.
It really pains me to read how home builders are treated in situations like this.
I hope for you that things will turn out well in the end.
Although I can only imagine that any compensation will be limited, since the defects usually date back too far to be “reasonably” fixed after the house is completed.
It’s somewhat like the diesel emissions scandal in the automotive industry. There, too, you only get small compensation, even though deception was obvious and you end up bearing the costs yourself afterward.
Similar topics