Building plan not followed by architect - consequence

Hello everyone,

thanks first of all for the responses. We have engaged the architect on an hourly basis.

The third (and supposedly final) draft now needs to be corrected again, namely in such a way that the 2nd full floor is not made into a full floor with a pitched roof. However, we are supposed to pay for the hours for this ourselves.

Mainly, it is important to me that the architect should have informed us about what is possible and what is not. Normally, it should first be irrelevant what the client wants, or it should first be clarified whether the wish fits within the building regulations. This did not happen here.
I have the feeling that the mentioned paragraph concerning the hillside floor was mishandled by the architect and accordingly was not taken into account in the design planning.
Only after feedback from the building authority does it now emerge that significant changes still need to be made, which really annoys me, because the architect should have known this (it is stated in the building plan). Of course, it also annoys me that I overlooked this point, but I am a layperson and expect from the professional that he draws my attention to it.
As I said, I think if these points had been clear right away, the planning would certainly have proceeded differently and, tendentially, more cost-effectively (fewer hours).

Best regards,

Dieter

As you wrote, you commissioned LPH 1-4. Obviously, LPH 1 has already gone wrong and needs to be corrected. In other words, the architect also owes success, for which you pay (or have already paid). So if his design (LPH§) is defective (because it is not approvable), he must of course make corrections at no additional cost to you. Or simply put: Task not fulfilled! Correct it.

The current and final draft would be approvable. However, only by the trick that the rooms in the basement floor are defined as hobby/cellar rooms. Since we are more or less dependent on the rental income of the basement apartment, we are reluctant to use any tricks that could lead to a complaint (from anyone) and then prevent us from continuing to rent it out. We have also made it clear by email that we definitely want to have the basement apartment.

Since we are more or less dependent on the rental income from the granny flat in the basement on the slope, we are reluctant to use any tricks that could lead to complaints (from whoever) and then prevent us from continuing to rent it out.

If I read it correctly, the floor may not be a residential floor then. So it is officially not rentable as an apartment if it is only a basement.

We also made it clear by e-mail that we definitely want to have the granny flat.

Then you may only build single-story plus the granny flat. You have to choose one. Either you get an approved granny flat, then please build only single-story. Or you build two-story and have an officially non-rentable granny flat in the basement - since it is not living space. P.S. If you are dependent on the rental income in the current interest phase in order to be able to build at all, you should give up your specific project.

Anyone who depends on the financing of the [Einliegerwohnung] should quickly review all the financial aspects again to determine whether building is even possible.

If I read it correctly, the upper floor may then not be a residential floor. So, as an apartment, it is not rentable (officially) if it is only a basement. Then you may only build one story plus the granny flat. You have to choose one option. Either you get an approved granny flat, then please build only one story. Or you build two stories and have in the basement an officially non-rentable granny flat – since it is no living space. P.S. If you depend on the rental income in the current interest phase in order to be able to build at all, you should give up your concrete project.

I could imagine that the OP definitely wants two residential levels, neither of which is at basement level, but since the house cannot be built on supports, the granny flat is needed, as he cannot afford that much basement. But in that constellation the bank will drop out anyway if the granny flat is declared not as an apartment but as a hobby basement?!

If I have read it correctly, then the upper floor may not be a residential floor. So it is not rentable as an apartment (officially) if it is only a basement.

Then you may only build a single story plus the granny flat.

You have to accept one of two options. Either you get an approved granny flat, then please build only a single story. Or you build two stories and have an officially non-rentable granny flat in the basement - since it is no living space.

P.S. If you depend on rental income in the current interest phase to even be able to build, you should give up your concrete project.

Thanks again for the response. Regarding financing, we could also manage without a granny flat, however, it would be a nice bonus that we would like to take since we actually don’t need the space.
We also understand that we have to accept one of two options. That is absolutely fine.
Only the fact that the planning never went in this direction and we only received this information at the last step and now also have to pay for the changes annoys me. The question was whether the architect violated his duty here.

Thanks again for the kind replies. Maybe I am a bit emotional about this topic, so I appreciate every feedback.

Many thanks,

Dieter