Choosing the right construction method in a new development area

Thank you all already for the feedback!

By the way, some builders in our new development area waited over 1 year for their red dot! Therefore, notification would be simply better for us to plan and of course significantly faster.

The development plan is very detailed, and we adhere to it in all points

Who says that: an experienced architect or a specialist lawyer for construction law? That is quite a bold statement (for laypeople?). We do not know your planning. So it is not possible for us to assess where there might be sticking points. Differences in legal opinions can grow on some trees at the speed of light, that can quickly backfire. What fixed-price promise is pressing you to hurry? My previous impression of you is that you are typical general contractor clients (including good faith in the quality of the inclusive planners for the "necessary architectural services"). A general contractor who already paws the ground with dollar signs in their eyes is quickly on board with the attitude "no problemo." I wonder if Lucky sees it that way too?

Therefore, should it be liable if it is built differently after all?

You obviously have the talent to miss the essence of an answer. So once again very briefly: Do not rely fundamentally and regardless of the chosen variant in house construction on your legal claim. If the simplest variant (3) works, then take it.

Never fundamentally and regardless of the chosen option in house construction rely on your legal claim.

What legal claim? – I don’t see any here! There is a legal claim against the independent architect (for the builder who commissioned him personally) for an approvable design. A general contractor is regularly (e.g. as a master mason) entitled to submit documents for a single-family house but does not legally act as an architect (and also without the professional liability insurance required for such). Conclusion: if the building authority orders the demolition of the house because it does not comply with the zoning plan in the worst case, the builder’s claims for recourse will fail. By the way, this also applies to an independent architect who the general contractor commissioned instead of the builder. Usually, the general contractor provides the “necessary architectural services” themselves, or the typical “rubber-stamp architect” is indeed an architect but senile.

Who says: an experienced architect or a specialized lawyer for construction law? That is already a very bold statement (for laypeople?). We don’t know your planning. So it is also not possible for us to assess where the sticking points might be. Differences in legal interpretations grow on some trees at the speed of light, that can quickly lead to trouble. Which fixed price promise is pressing you to hurry? My previous impression of you is that you are typical general contractor clients (together with good faith in the quality of the inclusive planners for the "necessary architectural services"). A general contractor who is already pawing with dollar signs in his eyes is quickly on board with the attitude "no problem". I wonder if Lucky sees it the same way?

That is what the architect of the construction company says. I inevitably have to rely on that. Why rush? Nobody is rushing us. The construction company usually builds classically with a building permit. But we just want to waste as little time as necessary and start building promptly. Unfortunately, your statement doesn’t really help us with the decision either.

You obviously have a talent for missing the essence of an answer. So once again, very briefly: Basically and regardless of the chosen option for building the house, do not rely on your legal claim. If the simplest option (3) works, then take it.

The only help is to build with a capable / experienced provider to avoid any legal claims in advance. I think it will be (3) as long as the construction company cooperates.