ᐅ What responsibilities do an architect and a property owner have?
Created on: 28 Jan 2017 18:25
M
Matthias9541
Dear future homeowners,
We plan to build a house measuring 8 m by 15 m (26 ft by 49 ft) on a gently sloping site. From the street view, the garage should be attached to the right side of the house, where the entrance door is also located. There is a 3 m (10 ft) distance between the house and the right property boundary; the garage should be built directly on the property line and adjacent to the house.
The building regulations from the local building authority state that the top edge of the floor slab must not exceed 30 cm (12 inches) above the highest ground level point where the building’s corner cuts into the natural terrain. Accordingly, the floor slab’s top edge could be at a maximum of 200.13 m above sea level, about 18 cm (7 inches) below the lowest point of the street. At this floor height and considering the slope of the building plot, there would be a height difference of approximately 1.30 m (4 ft 3 inches) between the house entrance and the driveway to the garage. As a result, the architect said the stairway to the front door would have extended up to 1.30 m (4 ft 3 inches) into the driveway.
After the architect explained this issue to me, I asked about possible solutions. He offered only one option: lowering the entire house by about 75 cm (2 ft 6 inches) to reduce the height difference between the entrance and the driveway. This would shorten the stairway’s intrusion into the driveway, allowing a car to pass by the stairs to enter the garage. I agreed, since the architect said there was no other alternative. I simply trusted the architect as the expert. After that, I received the building permit / planning permission.
When I was asked to sign the documents for the contractor again after the permit was granted, I took a closer look and realized that there had been another possible solution. If the entire building had been shifted about 1.30 m (4 ft 3 inches) to the left, from the street perspective—there was still space on that side—the house would not have needed to be lowered by 75 cm. This would have created a gap between the garage and the house wall on the right side. Naturally, I prefer the house to be only 18 cm (7 inches) below street level, not 93 cm (37 inches). Since this is what I want, I am now facing additional costs according to the architect: a flat fee of 500 euros for the developer, new site survey, new structural calculations, and a new building permit / planning permission application.
One might argue that I should have examined everything more carefully before obtaining the permit. However, one could also argue that the architect should have presented this second option to me. I am very interested in your opinion on this matter. How should I approach the cost issue with the contractor?
Thank you.
We plan to build a house measuring 8 m by 15 m (26 ft by 49 ft) on a gently sloping site. From the street view, the garage should be attached to the right side of the house, where the entrance door is also located. There is a 3 m (10 ft) distance between the house and the right property boundary; the garage should be built directly on the property line and adjacent to the house.
The building regulations from the local building authority state that the top edge of the floor slab must not exceed 30 cm (12 inches) above the highest ground level point where the building’s corner cuts into the natural terrain. Accordingly, the floor slab’s top edge could be at a maximum of 200.13 m above sea level, about 18 cm (7 inches) below the lowest point of the street. At this floor height and considering the slope of the building plot, there would be a height difference of approximately 1.30 m (4 ft 3 inches) between the house entrance and the driveway to the garage. As a result, the architect said the stairway to the front door would have extended up to 1.30 m (4 ft 3 inches) into the driveway.
After the architect explained this issue to me, I asked about possible solutions. He offered only one option: lowering the entire house by about 75 cm (2 ft 6 inches) to reduce the height difference between the entrance and the driveway. This would shorten the stairway’s intrusion into the driveway, allowing a car to pass by the stairs to enter the garage. I agreed, since the architect said there was no other alternative. I simply trusted the architect as the expert. After that, I received the building permit / planning permission.
When I was asked to sign the documents for the contractor again after the permit was granted, I took a closer look and realized that there had been another possible solution. If the entire building had been shifted about 1.30 m (4 ft 3 inches) to the left, from the street perspective—there was still space on that side—the house would not have needed to be lowered by 75 cm. This would have created a gap between the garage and the house wall on the right side. Naturally, I prefer the house to be only 18 cm (7 inches) below street level, not 93 cm (37 inches). Since this is what I want, I am now facing additional costs according to the architect: a flat fee of 500 euros for the developer, new site survey, new structural calculations, and a new building permit / planning permission application.
One might argue that I should have examined everything more carefully before obtaining the permit. However, one could also argue that the architect should have presented this second option to me. I am very interested in your opinion on this matter. How should I approach the cost issue with the contractor?
Thank you.
M
Matthias954128 Jan 2017 20:50That’s how it is. I signed the contract with the developer, who employs an architect. I was then able to choose a general contractor from several options offered by the developer, who will build my house as a turnkey project. I prefer not to disclose the name of the developer at the moment.
In my opinion, you planned carelessly or did not clearly communicate your wish list. Now someone else is supposed to be blamed, especially since it is going to cost money. This should have been clear before the building permit / planning permission application. He told you that the 3 m (10 feet) boundary can only be done if the house is set back deeper. You should have said then that you don’t want that and asked what else is possible.
M
Matthias954128 Jan 2017 21:04Nordlys and everyone else, thank you very much for your feedback.
I am not looking to assign blame. It is quite possible that I have made mistakes as well. Your feedback is important to me in order to assess this properly.
"He told you that the 3m (10 feet) limit can only be met if the house is lower." He did not say that. He gave an initial consultation, during which it was roughly determined where the garage would be located.
I am not looking to assign blame. It is quite possible that I have made mistakes as well. Your feedback is important to me in order to assess this properly.
"He told you that the 3m (10 feet) limit can only be met if the house is lower." He did not say that. He gave an initial consultation, during which it was roughly determined where the garage would be located.
A drawing would explain a lot better 🙂
I assume you have a contract with a general contractor. Since you own the plot of land, there is no developer involved!
Everything that needs to be clarified goes through the general contractor, not through their employees or hired subcontractors, even if an architect is creating the plans for you.
Your contract partner is the general contractor!
I assume you have a contract with a general contractor. Since you own the plot of land, there is no developer involved!
Everything that needs to be clarified goes through the general contractor, not through their employees or hired subcontractors, even if an architect is creating the plans for you.
Your contract partner is the general contractor!
Our situation is similar. We own the plot of land and are building with a general contractor. The project manager has a planner who creates the construction drawings and an external structural engineer. The manager is authorized to submit documents to the building authority as an engineer. After the last meeting and handshake in his office, we received all the drawings as PDFs. We confirmed that this matched what we had discussed. The general contractor then completed the building permit application. We went to his office and reviewed everything again, including the site plan and elevation details. The structural calculations were included as well, although I don’t fully understand them; the spreadsheets should be correct—we’re not building the Elbphilharmonie, after all. Then we signed three copies: one for me, one for the city, and one for the district. I took these to the city building authority, submitted them, and witnessed the official stamp of approval. Then I took them to the district office. Three weeks later, we received the approval along with the fee notice. We’re now bound by that. That’s how it is. Honestly, do you think your case was very different?
M
Matthias954128 Jan 2017 22:21YPG, sorry that I’m not very knowledgeable in legal matters, but the land already belonged to me before the contract was signed. It seems that the status of my contracting partner is that of a general contractor. I will now contact them. Attached is a small drawing. Nordlys, okay, I have to submit a new building permit / planning permission application, which will incur additional costs, but for me that is still the lesser evil compared to the fact that the house would be permanently 75 cm (30 inches) lower.
Similar topics