ᐅ Terrace Planning for an End-Row House with a Large Garden – What to Consider?

wiltshire schrieb:


I find it remarkable that there are so many difficult people around you.

In principle, it’s not particularly difficult, although some people have more or less trouble with the individual steps.

First, figure out what really matters and prioritize accordingly.

Then draft a solution that meets these requirements, follows the regulations, and stays within your own budget. With clear priorities, you can tell a convincing story to support your solution. Always keep in mind the benefits for others.

Go to the authorities in person with this solution and story, present everything (well organized), and obtain approval.

Afterwards, proceed with detailed planning and implementation.

Much of the success depends on good and personal communication with the authorities.

Of course, it helps me that I usually don’t perceive my environment as difficult and I tend not to get nervous, complain, or put pressure on others. With some calmness, you rarely run into trouble with official bodies.

So far, I have always gotten the special permits I wanted from different authorities and at different locations. Most of the time, I had a “cut-back option” included. This allowed decision-makers to reassure themselves that they had not simply approved everything. If fees were involved, I paid them.

That’s the strategy.

Hello dear Wiltshire,

Thank you very much for your reply. I have prepared a preliminary building inquiry but was still hesitant because someone from the neighborhood said she wouldn’t ask anymore – she just builds whatever and however she likes. I can understand that as well, since what’s happening in this newly developed area is really annoying. Some rules don’t make any sense, get introduced, and then are repealed for that very reason. Right after I read your message, I agree with you. I always have to be 100 percent sure and can’t proceed without full certainty.

The authorities can be annoying, lazy, and often unmotivated, but I’ve always had a good relationship with them and managed to get the bay window approved as a special case before. It was a lot of work to research everything and apply on my own since neither the construction company nor the architect could handle it, and the authorities kept requesting more details. Both parties somehow talked past each other. So, I did it myself: spoke with the authority about what they want and how, prepared the documents, and only had the architect sign them – and got all the permissions.

That’s how I will handle it this time too. The authority may be slow, but they are polite and friendly, so I’m confident a personal conversation will go well.

Thanks also for your tips! I will add something to the application explaining why I need the two terraces (barrier-free?) and that they fit in well, don’t disturb anyone, and are not oversized — the proportions are balanced.

I will of course pay the fees.

I admit it sounds a bit unplanned in the forum, but I had to start somewhere. It took a while to find a gardener, and everyone told me different things. Prices and offers varied a lot; it’s not easy, and it took me some time to get to the point of submitting a preliminary building inquiry.

Now I found someone who will build it for me at a reasonable price, recommended by an acquaintance. Now the question is how big I am allowed to build — and what I can afford. Depending on the allowed size, I will decide which paving stones to choose. I have some that cost 23 euros/m² (23 euros per square meter), up to 60 euros/m².

So here is the plan:

• Tomorrow morning, I will email the building authority to find out exactly who will receive the preliminary building inquiry. Then I will send them the inquiry by email. At the same time, I will schedule an appointment to submit and discuss it in person. The appointment only makes sense if the inquiry has been received, they are somewhat familiar with it, and know they have to respond. Otherwise, they will simply brush you off. They are polite but provide no information — I was there not long ago. So I think: send the inquiry by email first, then make an appointment and discuss it in person.
• Once the approval is granted, I will select the terrace stones and place the order.
• I have already selected the terrace sizes. Terrace 1: 8.50 x 4.20 m (28 feet x 14 feet) = 35.70 m² (384 square feet), and terrace 2 from the bay window: 4.00 x 3.00 m (13 feet x 10 feet) = 12 m² (129 square feet).
• I can afford and pay for that. Terrace roof: 7 x 4 m (23 feet x 13 feet), so 28 m² (301 square feet).
• So, the sizes are fixed. If this gets approved, I will know how much sealed surface area I’m allowed, how strictly this is evaluated, how precise the calculations have to be, and how much buffer I have. Then I will consider how to connect the terraces. If necessary, that could be a few extra square meters built “illegally,” or I might use a different surface material or similar, depending on the approval. If the connection is slightly illegal, it would only be a small area that I might risk — in case of inspection, it would only be a corner that’s too much... but I won’t know that until later.

So, that’s the plan. I want to thank everyone who has supported me with their contributions, helped me, and taken the time for me. I will keep you updated.

Hello!

Just to inform you, I submitted the preliminary building inquiry by email and spoke in person as well; I got an appointment for Thursday. The processing time is 4 weeks, as I was already told on the phone. That’s no problem, I expected it. I will still go there in person to talk.

I also asked a case officer again, without mentioning my specific case, about terraces and roofing.

A terrace without roofing is usually not a problem if it is outside the building line (setback line).

The problem is the terrace roofing, which counts as part of the main building and MUST ALWAYS be within the building line. Now, my main terrace has a building line depth of 175cm (5.7 feet). That means I am only allowed to build roofing up to 175cm (5.7 feet), but I applied for 4m (13 feet). That is 2.25m (7.4 feet) beyond the building line. Towards the street, I would still have more than 6m (20 feet). Along the house, it would not be a problem since the building line runs along the house. The neighbor also has roofing extending beyond the building line (3m / 10 feet). I don’t know if he has permission; I rather doubt it judging by him. Now my question is, how do you assess this—do you think I can get approval for the roofing? What arguments should I present to be allowed to build a 4m (13 feet) deep roofing? I would prefer not to use an awning or similar.

The site coverage ratio, etc., would not be a problem, probably not the terrace alone either, but the roofing. Is this still within reasonable limits? Especially since otherwise, I could hardly add any roofing to the house.

Bauherrin123 schrieb:

Now my question is, what do you think, do you believe I will get approval for the roof extension?

Normally: No.

Bauherrin123 schrieb:

What arguments should I present to be allowed to build a 4m (13 ft) deep roof extension? I would prefer not to use an awning or something similar.

Real arguments? None, except: The neighbor built something similar. But that could backfire on the neighbor. I wouldn’t worry about that, since that would be the only relevant argument. So ask your neighbors. Otherwise, use an awning or a fixed sun sail. Those are also more airy.

Bauherrin123 schrieb:

Is that still within the limits? Especially since otherwise, I could hardly attach a roof extension to the house.

You’re too late with that. You knew that BEFORE building the house. So no whining. No one forced you to build the house in a way that leaves no room for a patio roof. That was your own decision.
Oh, and is it within the limits? No. 175cm (5 ft 9 in) is within the limits. Or a sunshade or sun sail is within the limits.

Maybe on Thursday you’ll have a friendly person on the other side who is receptive to your request. But you do not have a right to it (unless your neighbor was legally allowed to build it).

Bauherrin123 schrieb:

A terrace roof that is considered part of the main building must ALWAYS fall within the building envelope.

Yes, this has been stated for years in the regional building codes. A smart builder would have included the roof in the original building application.
2.25 meters (7 ft 5 in) is not 30 centimeters (12 inches), so it’s not a minor issue.
You can’t really argue for special permission, since a roof over a terrace is neither essential nor mandatory.
But maybe you’ll get lucky, and if it’s true that the authorities tend to be somewhat lax, they might not bother to check thoroughly and approve it anyway. Who knows: even a blind hen and a foolish farmer don’t starve yet.

I was just thinking about the HB advertisement – who would get so upset about that?

Be a bit creative. You can permanently install the 1.75-meter (5 feet 9 inches) part and make the rest a "mobile roof." Secure it with wing nuts or something similar to show that you can remove it anytime and store it in the garage. If you don’t do that, nobody will be mad. You can leave an umbrella open all year as well. You can also set up the patio roof completely separate from the house. Then it’s not attached to the house. You can create the transition with an overhang or something mobile. Technically, you’re building a separate fixed tent, which in practice makes no difference from a solid roof.

Again, about the strategy:
I probably wasn’t detailed enough with my description. “Go to the authorities first with a clear explanation” means appearing in person and finding a joint solution. Only then submit the exact application. That way, you have some assurance that the permit will be granted and that you’re not going in blindly. This saves extra rounds of back-and-forth and time. The 4 weeks processing time is reasonable. Of course, if you then have to submit a revised application, that adds another 4 weeks.

wiltshire schrieb:

I was just thinking about the HB advertisement – who would get so worked up about that?

Be a bit creative. You can permanently install the 1.75 meters (5 feet 9 inches) and make the rest a "mobile roof." Secure it with wing nuts or something similar and show that you can remove it at any time and store it in the garage. No one will be upset if you don’t do this. You can also keep an awning open all year round. You can set up the patio roof completely separate from the house as well, so it’s not attached to the house. You create the connection with an overhang or something mobile. Technically, you are building a separate, fixed tent structure that in practice functions just like a fixed roof.

Back to the strategy:
I probably wasn’t detailed enough when I said "go to the authority with a good explanation" — this means appearing in person and working out a solution together. Only then submit the exact application. This is the only way to be reasonably sure the approval will be granted, so you aren’t flying blind. This saves extra rounds of back-and-forth and time. Four weeks is acceptable. Of course, if you then have to submit an amended application, you get another four weeks.

Thank you very much! I will consider alternative options; I honestly hadn’t thought that I could practically put up a tent independently from the house.

By the way, regarding the strategy, I completely agree with you. I have already been to the authority with such plans, but they don’t want to cooperate because they’re not motivated to do their job. Even if some people here don’t want to believe me. They don’t bother to familiarize themselves with the files, don’t open the paperwork, reject things outright (like my bay window back then) even though they actually should approve them, and later you get it in writing... The people are nice but incredibly lazy; meaningful consultation is hardly possible.

That’s why I had to take this approach—I first applied for what I want, hoping it might be approved. They will really have to deal with it now, and the appointment on Thursday will be better; they will listen and advise, and if something is missing, they will tell me because they know a building inquiry is in their hands and they HAVE to act. So this is okay; to start a conversation with the authority, I have to proceed this way. But by doing so, I’m also fighting for exactly what I want. Now they’re advising me as well, and if there are problems, I’ll have to make compromises and find solutions, but then they process things fast. I just had to start somewhere.

The building inquiry is therefore for an extension of the patio roof, and now they are reviewing it, familiarizing themselves with the case, advising, and if they do not agree, I will negotiate and possibly submit new applications to get approval. Unfortunately, the authority here doesn’t work any other way. They don’t even bother to reply in general, except for the urban planning department where the women are better. But the official responsible for approval literally gets out of breath when he has to answer the phone. It’s a slightly different order, but it was similar with the bay window—everything was rejected over the phone, no proper information given, then I applied in writing, and after about 100 forms were submitted, it finally went through. No matter what you submit, the authority always says something is missing. That’s why it’s better for me this way: I submit the application, and then we start; depending on what they want, I submit additions, negotiate, and have discussions. When we agree, I formally resubmit the application. Then it’s just a formality. I’m curious. The alternatives you suggested sound good as well, because I thought a 4-meter (13 feet 1 inch) deep canopy would darken my living room. So we’ll see.