ᐅ Mark the airspace – build directly enclosed (approximately 6–7 m²)?

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:

• Is this really common?
• Has anyone had experience with this (final inspection, later sale, insurance, etc.)?

Thanks for your insights!

dereks123 schrieb:

He said that this is common practice and usually not inspected.

Does the architect take responsibility for the consequences if it is inspected after all?

kbt09 schrieb:

Does the architect take responsibility if the project is checked after all?

Of course not 🙂
That’s why I’m quite skeptical about the whole thing.
I really can’t judge whether it’s just a minor issue that is common practice.
I can already see in the new development area, even in the outer parts, that builders don’t follow many regulations, like using L-shaped concrete blocks instead of natural stone or smaller parking spaces. So the builders are even deviating in publicly visible external areas. That’s why I’m uncertain.

Many people also run red lights. Usually, nothing happens, but if you do get caught, the fines are higher.

In the calculation of living area, only the planned area is counted. When selling the property, what the architect designed (closing off open space) then becomes an illegal construction for the buyer.

And no, it is illegal. There is no such thing as “a little illegal.” It’s all or nothing.

That’s the formal aspect. Of course, you can do it as suggested. But I don’t understand the problem. What is “closely related to the living area,” and what is being included? Why not just build it officially like that?

Why is an airspace area drawn in the first place? What is its purpose (I assume in the upper floor)?
Why isn’t actual living space planned instead of an airspace?

nordanney schrieb:

Many drivers run red lights. Usually nothing happens, but if you get caught, the fines are higher.

In the calculation of living space, only the area that was officially planned counts. When selling, what the architect planned (closing off an open space) then becomes an unauthorized construction for the buyer.

And no, it is illegal. There is no such thing as “a little illegal.” It’s either legal or not.

That’s the formal side. Of course, you can do it as suggested. But I don’t understand the issue. What exactly is “closely related to the living space,” and what will be included? Why not just build it officially that way?

It is an attic where we plan two dormer windows. This causes the total permissible living area to be exceeded. Therefore, the architect has designed an open void space in the attic, which is intended to be used as a regular room.