In this planning phase, I cannot agree 100%. Yes, with an architect, a building preliminary inquiry carries a completely different weight. But it really depends on the content, whether it is already necessary. If it is only about querying the dormers, you do not necessarily need a professional yet.
I consider the building preliminary inquiry to be well-invested time and possibly money to clarify the matter. Basically, a similar photo + floor plan of your dream house from a catalog, which you place on your property and formulate the most important questions about it, is sufficient. That should be almost free with a bit of initiative and Photoshop.
Absolutely. It is even sufficient to print out the cadastral extract to scale and borrow a protractor from an elementary school student. Your suggestion with the photo is somewhat unusual but practical and permissible. However, the illustration should not create misunderstandings, and photos of captains with 50 cm knee walls require some image editing ;-) For everyone who has misunderstood my words, I am happy to summarize the genesis of the (formally non-existent!) problem once again – with explicit emphasis on how grateful the OP is, with his approach, for demonstrating to the readers what the most clumsy conceivable approach is: If one starts without module A of the house construction roadmap (explained in the cited source) with an architect, instead leaving the design development to a competition among the draftsmen of the requested general contractors, one naturally also does not have a preliminary design in hand that one practically only needs to "stick in" the building preliminary inquiry. That was already an own goal – not serious but worthy of being commented on again and shown in slow motion to the readers. Simply so that the learning effect "sticks". Of course, you can submit the building preliminary inquiry yourself; it does not require planning authorization. Mistake number two was to continue communication with the building authority orally after omitting the written preliminary inquiry, because on the phone, the clerks – harmless for them but as shown here unsettling for the builder – can babble nonsense indefinitely. The fact is: there was never an official rejection on record, but the builder was effectively intimidated (and even went to a lawyer). The latter was, in terms of effort (both costs and time if one pursues the legal route), the next big own goal – that is how it is, and what is true must remain true – and one must also be allowed to say it without being met with a sulky snout. Besides, I have always contributed to making the OP not only aware of his own mistakes but also to showing the wise alternative – a path that can still be taken. Nobody here needs a lawyer, a (also self-made if desired) building preliminary inquiry suffices and will lead to a result in a short time: namely a positive decision or – then, however, an contestable rejection. You can
work with that instead of
speculating or worrying. So : draw the desired building volume with the protractor, politely write "max. 50 cm" next to the knee wall (which the captains must also comply with!) and enjoy calmly that the building authority cannot arbitrarily tighten the development plan. They will point out that the non-full-floor status of the attic must be observed – but the proof of that will then be provided by the submitter of the actual building application.