Objection or addendum to a monument protection order

Hello,

for our property there is a development plan for inner development in which every change that one is allowed to make is described.
Whether it is the roof, windows, exterior color for the property, stones for the parking lot.

In the application for the monument protection, we referred exactly to this document, point by point.

Unfortunately, the application was now rejected by the monument protection authority, the reason given was: too few details were mentioned.
Example: windows will be installed again with Vienna bars, white paint, and without roller shutters. – We referred to the chapter in the development plan in the application.
The authority, however, wants exactly this continuous text to be included in the application.

Unfortunately, it continues like this with almost all points.

Now my question is, what to do. Unfortunately, we are a bit pressed for time, the window manufacturer has been waiting for our go-ahead for three months.

Should we now file an objection and formulate the application as detailed as desired (which we have already done with the architect) or simply call the authority and present the revised documents again?

I am just afraid that it will start all over again and the authority will insist on their right for three months in which they have time to review.
(In the current application, the rejection was in the system after 5 days, but the application could no longer be found and was only sent to us almost 2 months after submission.)

Thank you for your advice

What does the architect say? That's his job, to make such decisions or to clarify with the responsible authority what they want.

What does the architect say? That is his job, to make such decisions or to clarify with the responsible authority what they want now.

We had our difficulties with the architect anyway.
The monument authority is so petty, he doesn’t understand why they make such demands when there is already a development plan.

He has now updated all drawings (mullions in the windows, parking lot precisely drawn) and made the description more detailed.

We had our difficulties with the architect anyway. The monument authority is so petty, he doesn't understand why they make such demands when there is a development plan.

That sounds like an architect not specialized in building within existing structures. A development plan does not replace monument protection.

Complete failure on the part of the architect. As has already been pointed out quite accurately here: the fact that he does not seem to understand that the development plan and compliance with monument protection regulations have nothing to do with each other and that he is now insulting the monument protection authority is rather pathetic. I know the approach of an architect I am familiar with who works a lot with protected monuments quite differently. In every measure, the monument protection authority is involved from the very beginning, and property owners are only presented with proposals that are clearly likely to be approved. Communication with the authority is really the be-all and end-all in this area. Yes, some petty-minded decision-makers sit there who unnecessarily make life difficult for well-intentioned property owners (and thus may ultimately do a disservice to the goals of monument protection), but on the other hand, this is somewhat understandable when you see how some black sheep exploit loopholes and completely ruin historic objects at the first opportunity.

Since the architect obviously does not maintain a good relationship with the monument protection authority and apparently has no desire to do so, I would probably have to pick up the phone myself here, for better or worse. Explain your problem, time pressure, etc. politely, make it clear that you did not want to bypass any regulations, and ask what the best approach for a quick solution is.

I would probably just pick up the phone myself here, whether I like it or not. Kindly explain your problem, time pressure, etc., make it clear that you did not intend to violate any regulations, and ask what the best approach is now for a quick solution.

Exactly. The easiest way to get rid of a negative attitude is through conversation. The fact is that you all want to meet the requirements – there should be a quick solution – even if it is just the fast processing of the corrected application. My impression: The architect made it a bit too easy for himself. Have the corrections made promptly, check them, submit yourself, and done.