ᐅ Practical Process for Purchasing a Plot of Land with Development Potential under Section 34 of the Building Code
Created on: 24 Dec 2016 21:09
R
R.Hotzenplotz
Hello,
my wife and I have been searching for a suitable plot of land for well over two years. Now we have found something that could be a very good match. There is no local development plan here, so Section 34 of the Building Code applies. Currently, there is a bungalow from 1962 on the site.
I am interested in the best way to proceed—especially regarding the sequence of steps—to avoid making any mistakes.
I first inquired with the building authority whether we are allowed to build two full stories here, as anything less would be a deal-breaker for us. The key statements from the building authority were as follows:
“Two full stories are permitted regarding wall height. Alternatively, one full story plus a recessed upper floor or one full story plus a pitched roof as seen across or next door.”
“With two full stories, only flat or shallow shed roofs work; nothing more. An on-site inspection has already taken place.”
When I asked if I could attend an official building consultation to get an idea of what is actually allowed here and what is not, I received the following reply:
“Your best option is to hire an architect and have them advise you, as I cannot provide more information than what has already been mentioned. Since this falls under Section 34 of the Building Code, there are design possibilities that I cannot address in a public building consultation. That is the architect’s responsibility.
The basic parameters are: maximum 2 full stories overall, building depth adapted to neighboring buildings, 1 parking space per residential unit, open building pattern.
Once your architect has prepared a plan, my colleagues and I can check if it fits within the surrounding framework. Only then does a consultation appointment make sense.”
The general contractor I’m in contact with finds this procedure very unusual. How do other professionals here see it? I also don’t find it ideal, since such a general contractor won’t provide detailed planning that can be submitted to the building authority when it’s not even clear whether the land will be purchased. And I would only buy the land if I know I can at least roughly build what we envision there.
In this context, the question arises as to what the building authority means by “open building pattern” in connection with the two full stories, which apparently are possible?
How would you recommend proceeding here? The chances of buying the plot are good. Negotiations will continue in early January. But I will only sign at the notary if I know what is feasible on this site and what is not... I also understand any general contractor not wanting to deliver detailed planning (possibly including a geotechnical survey) when they don’t even know if construction will actually proceed or if they will be commissioned...
If you also find the building authority’s approach unusual, what would be the usual procedure?
Looking forward to your input...
my wife and I have been searching for a suitable plot of land for well over two years. Now we have found something that could be a very good match. There is no local development plan here, so Section 34 of the Building Code applies. Currently, there is a bungalow from 1962 on the site.
I am interested in the best way to proceed—especially regarding the sequence of steps—to avoid making any mistakes.
I first inquired with the building authority whether we are allowed to build two full stories here, as anything less would be a deal-breaker for us. The key statements from the building authority were as follows:
“Two full stories are permitted regarding wall height. Alternatively, one full story plus a recessed upper floor or one full story plus a pitched roof as seen across or next door.”
“With two full stories, only flat or shallow shed roofs work; nothing more. An on-site inspection has already taken place.”
When I asked if I could attend an official building consultation to get an idea of what is actually allowed here and what is not, I received the following reply:
“Your best option is to hire an architect and have them advise you, as I cannot provide more information than what has already been mentioned. Since this falls under Section 34 of the Building Code, there are design possibilities that I cannot address in a public building consultation. That is the architect’s responsibility.
The basic parameters are: maximum 2 full stories overall, building depth adapted to neighboring buildings, 1 parking space per residential unit, open building pattern.
Once your architect has prepared a plan, my colleagues and I can check if it fits within the surrounding framework. Only then does a consultation appointment make sense.”
The general contractor I’m in contact with finds this procedure very unusual. How do other professionals here see it? I also don’t find it ideal, since such a general contractor won’t provide detailed planning that can be submitted to the building authority when it’s not even clear whether the land will be purchased. And I would only buy the land if I know I can at least roughly build what we envision there.
In this context, the question arises as to what the building authority means by “open building pattern” in connection with the two full stories, which apparently are possible?
How would you recommend proceeding here? The chances of buying the plot are good. Negotiations will continue in early January. But I will only sign at the notary if I know what is feasible on this site and what is not... I also understand any general contractor not wanting to deliver detailed planning (possibly including a geotechnical survey) when they don’t even know if construction will actually proceed or if they will be commissioned...
If you also find the building authority’s approach unusual, what would be the usual procedure?
Looking forward to your input...
R
R.Hotzenplotz25 Dec 2016 10:38dohuli schrieb:
In short: My recommendation would be to discuss your plans with the responsible person at the building authority. It’s free of charge and will at least give you a rough idea whether your plans are feasible.I have already done that (see above the italicized text; those are the responses from the building authority). They only provide building consultations if there is an architect’s design submitted. Until then, I have to live with the statements made so far.
Nofret schrieb:
Look at the neighboring buildings: whatever you see there will definitely be allowed.I think we are beyond that point, judging by the contact with the building authority. The area mostly consists of bungalows or one-and-a-half-story houses. However, there are also a few newer houses nearby with two full stories and flat roofs. And the building authority signals in the email that this might be possible as long as an open building style is maintained...
Otherwise, this topic would be settled for us. We have defined the feasibility of two full stories as a deal-breaker.
I just find it unfortunate that you can’t have a direct meeting with the building authority—an architect’s design has to be submitted first. If I had only listened to the general contractor—“You will never get approval for two full stories there”—then I wouldn’t have bothered with this at all. But as I said, the building authority’s email says otherwise. The problem is that this is not legally binding, and I trust a few lines in an email less than sitting down for 20 minutes to calmly discuss the plot and getting a clear verbal indication that we can plan for two full stories, and that maybe some adjustments would be needed here or there...
After all, I have to buy the plot before I have an approved building permit/planning permission... or you would have to commission the general contractor to prepare a comprehensive architect’s design without knowing if a notarized contract will even happen, etc.
I have sent the building authority a rough draft of the 200m² (2,150 sq ft) model house with two full stories and am waiting for feedback early January.
I would simply go to the building authority during their office hours. The staff will likely only respond to written inquiries in writing. Since they have to be more cautious with written information than with verbal answers, they usually provide a standard response that does not include any binding information. This way, you avoid a situation where you come back later saying, “Mr. XY wrote this, and I even have it in writing.”
It’s better to go there in person and clearly explain what you want and why you cannot or do not want to bring an architect yet – basically exactly what you described here. That’s how it worked for us, and the staff were very friendly and helpful.
It’s better to go there in person and clearly explain what you want and why you cannot or do not want to bring an architect yet – basically exactly what you described here. That’s how it worked for us, and the staff were very friendly and helpful.
To me, this sounds more like your general contractor (GC) either doesn’t know or doesn’t want to deal with this.
In the context of §34, you have to proceed exactly as the building authority recommends, because without concrete plans, the authority will not provide any reliable written information beyond what you have already been told.
There are three options:
1. You buy the plot and then put forward a preliminary design or work together with the building authority to explore what is feasible, generally based on the neighboring development. However, this can result in conditions imposed during the approval process that you might find unfavorable. Therefore, it is advisable...
2. ... not to work with a GC, or to do so only if the GC has a competent architect familiar with §34 who can assess the possibilities in advance—before the purchase. Alternatively, you can...
3. ... submit a building enquiry before buying, to clarify any disputed points. However, a building enquiry only makes sense if it is not a standard request, but rather structured so that any potentially critical issues are clearly presented, enabling the authority to give a definite position can and must provide.
I would never build under §34 with just a GC, but always only with an independent local architect who knows the building authority and can provide several similar projects as references. Alternatively—what also exists—is that the GC works with an independent external architect capable of adapting the GC’s standard house to the specific circumstances under §34 or the particular case.
Best regards
Dirk Grafe
In the context of §34, you have to proceed exactly as the building authority recommends, because without concrete plans, the authority will not provide any reliable written information beyond what you have already been told.
There are three options:
1. You buy the plot and then put forward a preliminary design or work together with the building authority to explore what is feasible, generally based on the neighboring development. However, this can result in conditions imposed during the approval process that you might find unfavorable. Therefore, it is advisable...
2. ... not to work with a GC, or to do so only if the GC has a competent architect familiar with §34 who can assess the possibilities in advance—before the purchase. Alternatively, you can...
3. ... submit a building enquiry before buying, to clarify any disputed points. However, a building enquiry only makes sense if it is not a standard request, but rather structured so that any potentially critical issues are clearly presented, enabling the authority to give a definite position can and must provide.
I would never build under §34 with just a GC, but always only with an independent local architect who knows the building authority and can provide several similar projects as references. Alternatively—what also exists—is that the GC works with an independent external architect capable of adapting the GC’s standard house to the specific circumstances under §34 or the particular case.
Best regards
Dirk Grafe