Nicolefl
2021-10-01 13:13:09
- #1
Then it is and remains that way, unless you want to go through this process including the duration again. Significant changes will require a new application, consistent external dimensions won’t help here. There are two things I still haven’t understood: namely the roof construction and the building being set forward about 1m in front of the building boundary towards the street.
You have shot yourselves in the foot twice, namely the airspace and the square shape of the house footprint, in addition to the already high density of wishes/requirements for the house size. Am I correct in assuming that the design was developed from a catalog city villa?
I find the house surprisingly/remarkably successful as a compromise considering its borderline small "size," I would actually only remove the airspace and would have forgone the exemption from the building boundary – is that perhaps significantly responsible for the long processing time?
It seems to me that in your clever draftsman, an architect has almost been lost, who apparently only managed to dissuade you from the airspace, unfortunately not.
I must admit, our architect tried to talk us out of the airspace and the straight staircase. Now I at least have doubts about the airspace myself. That can probably be removed without problems and a storage room could be planned there.
What about the roof construction?
The building was moved forward by one meter so that we have one more meter of garden in the back. We are grateful for every meter we can gain. The meter was agreed with the city by phone beforehand and was the maximum they could give us. According to the city, the long processing time of the building application is due to corona on the one hand and the flood on the other. We were strongly affected by it and the administration was closed for weeks. But to be honest, they are always slower with us than other municipalities.