Construction application costs only 40 euros due to exemption application?

But that is the principle of the cutout. The engineers and the builder take responsibility. If the surveyor calculates and shows the distances as fitting, then it is okay.

Could it be that the issue of surveyors is handled differently in various federal states? Our surveyor merely transferred the building’s position from the plans made by the architect onto the site. I would be surprised if they had checked the setback areas. Maybe my point is not clear. What really annoys me is that a neighbor raises their plot by 1.6 meters, calculates the distances from that level, does not list access paths, parking spaces, and sealed areas in the planning documents in order to stay within the floor area ratio numerically, then starts building, and the neighbors as laypeople have to notice that the building is way too large and too close to the neighbors’ plots. If the neighbors had not measured and calculated themselves, the guy would have just thrown his building there and all the neighbors would have suffered. A subsequent removal order would no longer be proportionate, and the building would have to be accepted as is (the same happened five years ago with the same builder two streets away – building too high, later it was said that it must be tolerated because dismantling would be disproportionate). So you call the district office and report it. They come out and only check the height of the concrete foundation slab above street level. Then at some point, you ask the district office whether the distances were also checked. “No, only the height.” “Yes, but the distances depend on the height, and also the floor area ratio is not right.” “No, they have to tell us that…” So the same game again. Distances are checked and are wrong because they were not measured from the natural ground level. The builder revises the plan (shifts the upper floor 1 meter back, the rest stays the same – 4 apartments). It goes on. Again to the district office: “What about the floor area ratio? That can’t be right. Four apartments means eight parking spaces plus driveway plus terraces. That can’t be correct.” “Yes, it is correct.” “Have you recalculated it?” “No, no check was required.” “Then please recalculate it.” Four weeks later, during the plan inspection at the building department, you learn that the builder is now planning only 3 apartments in the house because otherwise he would not meet the floor area ratio... What is the point of a development plan with specifications if compliance is not checked? It makes no sense. This is not about aesthetic questions but about things that affect other people and their property. It can’t be that there is a municipal building authority that would rather look at whether there is a wooden slat fence or if a red rather than a reddish-brown roof covering was used instead of checking whether there is a MASSIVE violation of the development plan specifications. What is the building authority and a development plan for if laypeople like neighbors have to check compliance if they want to ensure they do not suffer disadvantages? As I said, I don’t need regulations if they are non-binding – and in fact, they are if they are not checked and sanctioned. Then they are just recommendations... okay, that doesn’t help us now, but I just had to get that off my chest.

Well, you added the "unchecked," but I didn’t say anything about that.

That’s correct. That’s why I wrote that your statement sounds as if... . After all, you wrote about an immediate construction stop until clarification.

Who said anything about significant?

I did.

You constantly change the facts.

No. Which fact have I changed? A significant construction violation leads to a construction stop, an insignificant one does not, regardless of whether a building permit exists or an exemption from approval.

Maybe you just briefly say what the differences between exemption from approval and building permit procedure are for the builder.

I already did that in #21. If the explanations from in #24 are not sufficient, I would try again.

With us, setback areas are recalculated

With us too, and that’s a good thing because long-term experience with exempted cases has shown that the number of incompetent or unscrupulous planners is greater than the legislator assumed. But there are also builders who get indignant that because of detected deviations, the procedure was changed to a permit-required one, since checking is supposedly not the task of the authority.

After the issuance of the building permit, a challenge by neighbors means filing a lawsuit, which has NO suspensive effect.

That is correct. However, approved facts are questioned here and no construction violations are reported. Hence my "would have, would have." If your neighbor had applied for an exemption regarding the floor area ratio exceeding, a permit procedure would automatically have been necessary. If the exemption had been granted, the neighbors would have had to sue, which would have had no suspensive effect. If the exemption had not been granted and your neighbor received the building permit after plan modification but builds according to the original plans, then the building permit does not have to be challenged; rather, a construction violation must be reported, which leads to immediate construction stop because the building is not according to the permit.

...and relevant regulations do not include applicable, planning-relevant figures of the development plan such as floor area ratio, number of parking spaces, building height, etc.?

Yes, definitely. Maybe my sentence structure was misleading. The planner must state that his building project complies with the regulations. Depending on the federal state, various other declarations must be made as well (fire protection, structural stability, proof of insurance, ...).

and whoever checks at best counts the number of pages

Exactly! In Lower Saxony, this is even explicitly stated again in the state building code
§62 (5) NBauO
... 2 The municipality has no further duty to check the construction measure beyond this.

Could it be that the issue of surveyors is handled differently in different federal states?

Yes.

A subsequent removal order would then no longer be proportionate and the building would have to be accepted as such (exactly the same was done by the same builder two streets away 5 years ago – too high building, later it was said that it must be tolerated because dismantling would be disproportionate).

Your statements indeed suggest that slowpokes sit in your office, who nevertheless act in accordance with the law.

and de facto they are, if they are not checked and sanctioned.

Most planners work professionally, and most violations are also sanctioned. But the individual cases are increasing.
O.T.: An architect once told me that in downtown locations, building beyond the boundary line contrary to the building permit is done intentionally. By the time the neighbor notices, the shell construction is finished and dismantling would be disproportionate. The resulting compensation is usually cheaper than the profit from the gained space. No risk, no fun. If it is noticed beforehand, tough luck. Then the specially founded GmbH simply goes bankrupt and a new one cheaply acquires the insolvency estate or a construction sector remains dormant for years. What can you do, criminals exist everywhere.

I’ll join this thread, at least my question fits the original question.
From the construction company, we have received an "estimate of ancillary construction costs," divided into "fixed ancillary costs" (architect, soil survey, surveying...) and "individual ancillary costs" (kitchen, outdoor facilities, garage...). The "fixed ancillary costs" all sound relatively plausible; it was said on the audio track that upper limits are entered there in some cases, but individual parts can also be significantly cheaper in favorable circumstances ("Better to plan a bit more and then save than to plan cheaply and then have to finance more later" – a basically good attitude from the nice gentleman and contrary to many other providers, where you rather get the feeling that they calculate the house cheaply and you have many unplanned extra costs afterward).

One point caught my attention during the plausibility check, because I don’t understand it at all: the building permit costs. They are estimated at about 250 EUR. When I asked whether that would only be the building notification and what the consequences would be if you deviate in any way from the development plan, the answer was: "Don’t worry, if it’s approved, it’s approved. Nobody can object to that."
For a building notification, the estimate seems way too high to me, but for a building permit, definitely too low.
After all, we are talking about a prefab house according to KfW40+ as a plus-energy house with upscale fittings, exceeding 300,000 euros not just by a few cents.

The estimate of 5 per mille of the construction price for the permit that you find on the internet would thus be over 1,500 EUR. Or is the fee for the building permit calculated differently after all?

If relevant: We want to build in Lower Saxony; here there is the construct of the "simplified building permit" for single-family houses. The fee table provides:

Approval of a construction measure or a building under the simplified building permit procedure according to § 63 Lower Saxony Building Regulations



a)
per started 500 euros of the shell construction value

4.30,
but at least 60



b)
if the shell construction value is difficult to determine, per started 500 euros of the production value

3.20,
but at least 60


Even here, I only get about 250 EUR if the shell construction value is just 29,000 EUR, so not even a tenth of the house price. That sounds pretty unimaginable to me. Can that be true, did he tell total nonsense regarding this point, or am I so wrong with my assumptions?

Sounds pretty unthinkable to me. Could it be that he talked complete nonsense regarding this point, or am I so wrong with my assumptions?

To my question whether that would be just the building notification and what the consequences would be if one deviated from the development plan in any way, the answer was: "Don't worry, if approved, then it's approved. Nobody can object to that").

The way you write it, you are obviously talking about different things. You asked about the costs and he answered about deviations from the development plan.

You have found the calculation basis. And above there is a guideline value of €800-1000 as an order of magnitude.