Terrace planning for a corner terraced house with a large garden - What to consider?

Okay, true, that is an argument that they are not necessarily responsible for it. They only approve or control it, and architects should act consultatively in advance. We simply had bad luck with the architect. I also said from the beginning that she was not motivated either. So, two parties came together who just prolonged the start – with constant ping-pong, in which both, sometimes rightly, sometimes wrongly, blamed each other. We were the ones who suffered. That is why I was fine with settling it directly with the office, preparing the documents myself, and having the architect only put the stamp on it so that the building permit went through.

Since we no longer have an architect and I have only had bad experiences so far, I have trained myself, submitted the preliminary building application, and will personally hand it in on Thursday. A terrace and a roof are also something different from house construction – that can be done afterward without an architect.

The office was also an obstacle in everything. Maybe that is why it was good to get the most important things (house, bay window, parking spaces) approved first and start with them. Otherwise, we might have already failed at the terrace roof, and everything else would have been further delayed.

Certainly, it would have been less work for me if everything had been included in one application. But just as the office did not want to move or make any effort, the same was true for the architect. I was dependent on both and made the best of it. Even if I had thought about it back then, I wouldn't have added anything – I just wanted the house to be finished.

Since the same employees are still at the office, I will now see how they decide. However, I don't think they would decide very differently today than they did back then.

It is also often the case that architects plan something and the office then objects. Then replanning is necessary, especially when much is a matter of interpretation and at the discretion of the caseworker. And if they have a certain scope, they should at least act honestly and consultatively, as someone wrote above. But that was not the case for me.

I must also say that much that architects rely on – for example, that grass grid stones or eco-paving are only counted half or proportionally towards the floor area ratio – was fully counted here at the office. The office had a few special peculiarities, and ultimately you just had to negotiate. I won with the bay window, but only because the owner of the property works in the building office in another federal state, was knowledgeable, and helped me. The architect had no clue and was brushed off.

That is why I find my way okay: I applied for my two large terraces with my desired roof, then I find out what is possible and what is not, can negotiate, make compromises, and think again about the covering and stones for the terrace or the roof.

I have a gardener, the price is right, I decided the size of the terrace, the preliminary building application is running, and in parallel, I am still choosing what I would like... Sometimes things just have to run in parallel and start together; in the end, you can decide individually how to proceed.

I am curious.

I do not want to defend any offices for heaven's sake. The people at the building authority are primarily inspectors, just like the people at the tax office.

They are not tasked with doing other people's work; there are architects or tax advisors for that. Whoever thinks they can do it alone, fine, but then it must also be correct, otherwise it will be rejected.

With your current approach of "I'll just apply for whatever I want; they can tell me how to do it differently or accommodate me..."
I'm not surprised that no one at the building authority wants to deal with you anymore.
Your building application will probably be returned rejected, and after this almost brazen stunt, no one will be willing to talk to you about a compromise, where legally there cannot be a compromise.

For heaven's sake, I don't want to defend any authorities. The people in the building department are primarily inspectors, just like the people in the tax office. They are not tasked with doing other people's work; for that, there are architects or tax consultants. If someone thinks they can manage it on their own, fine, but then it has to be correct, otherwise it will be rejected. With your current approach, following the motto "I'll just apply for whatever I want, and they can tell me how it should be done or accommodate me..." I'm not surprised that no one in the building department wants to deal with you anymore. Your building application will probably be rejected, and after this almost brazen move, no one will be inclined to discuss a compromise with you, where legally there can be no compromise.

Where is the problem in applying to build 2 meters beyond the building envelope if half the street has built that way? What is brazen about it? I called and emailed there, and I was even told to mark what I would like to have and they would review it... I don't understand your comment.

Submitted the building preliminary request on Thu. It was really good that I did it in person. I was able to explain it to him again or rather, he wanted me to formulate the question more directly on the request, etc. I wrote it directly by hand on it. He got the file and familiarized himself with it, didn’t know some things but looked them up. He said that terraces are not a problem and building envelopes for the roof are not an issue for him either, but only with neighbor approval. However, he wants to consult city planning about it. He will formally process it in the next few days or submit it to city planning. The receipt stamp was made, some things were discussed.

The approach was also the right one; he said that if I know what is allowed, how much can be exceeded, etc., I have a guideline. Then I can get an architect and submit the building application with her precisely. The building application is then only a formal act that will be approved. He will be on vacation at the end of this week, good that I was there in time; he will submit it to city planning before his vacation, they will evaluate it, and then when he is back, he will give the answer. So I won’t lose much time because of his vacation. I will call city planning next week to inquire. Unfortunately, it only works here if you appear in person on-site or constantly follow up, otherwise they put the file aside and do nothing. I also want to talk to city planning in person.