Air heat pump or use gas and solar?

too rough. There are no freestanding exemptions in SH for house construction. You always have a permit. If there is a B plan, and you build according to it without extra exceptions, then it is a simplified permit, which is issued within four weeks or even faster.

too slow. Give confirmation and say that you assume this solution complies with the energy saving ordinance. Done and dusted.

too rough. There are no free approvals in SH for house construction. You always have a permit. If there is a development plan and you build accordingly without special exceptions, then it is a simplified permit, which is issued within four weeks or even faster.

Ahh, interesting, I actually didn’t know that. But then what is the difference to the approval exemption? It says nothing else: if there is a development plan and you comply with it, the municipality (not the building/ district office) approves and you can build, but as soon as someone feels bothered and requests a review at the office, the construction stops (suspensive effect of the exemption). With the building office’s simplified permit it takes 8 to 12 weeks (currently closer to 12), costs 0.1% of the construction costs as permit fee, but has no suspensive effect. That means no one can just impose a construction stop because they feel like it. Full building application (nobody does that here anymore if there is a development plan), MUCH longer (partly 8 months and more) and a different fee structure. So in SH you have the choice only between simplified permit (issued by whom?) or the proper one? If yes, when could the case with the two Hansels happen from your perspective, when your permit was granted and has no suspensive effect? Hmm, no, I don’t quite understand it yet [emoji51]

The approval is always granted by the district building authority or, in the case of the four independent cities, by their municipal authority. The official procedure is always submission via the municipal building office to the district (practically, if there is a zoning plan, the employee of the municipality stamps it, confirming compliance with the zoning plan, and then it goes through the district very quickly). I see the difference more in the length of the questionnaire for the application. A regular building permit also takes 4-6 weeks here if everything is complete. About the costs: For a value of 160,000, I paid 800 euros to the district. I am hardly allowed to build anything here in Schleswig-Holstein without permission, maybe a garden shed or a carport. I don't even have to report or notify for that. The construction stop case: A neighbor doubts whether everything is okay. Claims that we built too high, added too much sand. He says he has no sun. He goes to the KBA. They call the builder, in practice the construction manager. What do you do there? Someone quacks! The construction manager says, nothing different from the approval. Nothing? Nothing! Okay. The employee from the office goes out again very promptly, if everything is okay, the guy gets a rejection; but if not, and we lied, then it will be unpleasant and a stop. This happened here, for example, with a grandfather who thought his house belonged on a commander's hill. They forced him to remove the expensive earth he had brought in and to comply with the rules that the existing terrain must not be altered and that foundation slabs including terraces must be leveled.

The difference in case of doubt is the contact person. In building permit procedures, the authority is responsible for the review and “legalizes” the planning. If someone wants to cause trouble, they dispute the permit and thus the authority. In [Freisteller] it is only determined that no permit is required. If someone wants to cause trouble, the way is a private law action against the builder. Karsten, you should be glad if it goes that quickly for you. The state building code NRW sets a 6-week deadline for simplified building permits, extendable to 12 weeks. None of the new neighbors had the notice in under 12 weeks. Rather 14 weeks, which is why no one dares to dispute it...

This happened here, for example, with a grandpa who thought his house belonged on a field marshal's hill.

Hmm, he didn’t happen to move to Franconia by any chance, did he? Because we also have a case like that here (the one with the construction stop) - only he had already poured the base slab in a cloak-and-dagger operation. Now everything has been standing since September, including rotting material and a construction crane...

You can’t just build here like that, maybe that was misunderstood. The client wants to build, the submission planning goes from the architect/contractor to the municipal building authority for a spot check: parking spaces observed, nominal setback areas correct, open space design and drainage planning included. Then they say yes or no, if yes it goes to the next municipal council meeting and they formally approve it. And then it can start. Time required 2 to 4 weeks (depending on when the next council meeting takes place), cost: 40€.

It gets trickier with slight deviations from the development plan, for example if the setback area to a public space is undershot in a small area or a different roof color is desired. Then the council has to approve it - this is called an isolated exemption from the development plan regulations. But in our case, the council is very picky about roof colors, not even the municipal building authority can understand the council’s whims.
The difference here is basically the impact on construction activities: exemption - if someone calls the state office as the approval authority on a whim, they have to check the matter, during the investigation the construction site is on hold. With a building permit, they check the construction site but construction activities continue. In our field marshal’s case, he simply miscalculated the setback areas and listed too few parking spaces. He, for example, did not calculate setback areas from the natural ground, i.e. including embankment, but from the top edge of the embankment - which makes a difference if you have 1.80m of embankment. In my opinion, the municipal building authority should have seen that, but they say they lack the specialist staff for that, they only do a superficial check. My recommendation: neighbor be vigilant and look at the plans in the building authority if something seems strange. In that case it was good, otherwise he would have built too big for the second time (!) in the immediate neighborhood. Once it’s built, they say dismantling it is disproportionate... that’s how you can also create facts...

Ok, back to topic [emoji51]

The calculations have now been completed. It now seems to definitively remain with Gas / Solar.

The preliminary energy certificate shows 35.8 kWh as final energy demand and 42.1 kWh as primary energy demand. The requirement value according to the Energy Saving Ordinance is shown as 47.2 kWh.

The solar share is listed here as 16.1%.

This results in a demand for:
a) Gas: 12,862 kWh
b) Auxiliary energy (electricity): 1,501 kWh

Regarding the equipment, it states:
Gas condensing boiler with 17 kW (design by TGA planner required)

Hot water generation (demand 5,009 kWh):
40% via solar system
60% via gas heating

Otherwise, it says "design by TGA planner required" many times.