Find out how to apply for and finally get a higher building height in building and plot development terms and conditions (Pol.: WZ – warunki zabudowy)

The height of a newly designed building is one of the most important parameters of the building’s project and therefore the cost-effectiveness of the investment. Have you ever wondered that you could try to negotiate the height of the building at the stage of obtaining the Terms of Buildings (WZ), with appropriate arguments in your pocket? Recently I have participated twice in such procedures and twice successfully, so I have decided to share this knowledge with you.

How does a clerk work while developing Terms of Buildings (WZ)?

When we apply for a terms of building decision, one of the parameters of the new building is its maximum height. On what basis is it calculated by a clerk? If we have a plot of land, we should mark the area of ​​study, which will then be a subject of analysis by the clerk – article 61 (1) to (5) of the “Ustawa o planowaniu i zagospodarowaniu przestrzennym”. This area is limited by three times the value of the front of the plot, but not less than 50 meters in each direction (according to §3 point 1 of the legislation act titled „Rozporządzenie Ministra Infrastruktury z dnia 26/08/2003r w sprawie sposobu ustalania wymagań dotyczących nowej zabudowy i zagospodarowania terenu w przypadku braku miejscowego planu zagospodarowania przestrzennego” – Dz. U. z 2003r. nr 164 poz. 1588). It is known that the area’s boundary line may pass through part of other building plots. So these plots, at least half of which are located in the studied area,  are taken into account for analysis. However, if a plot is located in the disputable borderline area and the investor cares whether or not this plot should be included in the area, it is always possible to question the clerk’s credibility, because his accuracy is based on a printed paper map, ruler, and pen.  Whereas a land surveyor, having the coordinates of the boundaries of the building plot, is able, within a few centimeters’s accuracy, to determine the length of the plot’s side, then draw up an arc in each direction from the corners of the plot concerned and build the plot’s boundary with a much greater accuracy then the clerk.

Is it necessary?

A very rare situation is when we don’t want any plot in the borderline area to go under analysis because there is no building on it at all and it will worsen our WZ (building area, building intensity,% of biologically active area or height building). It is also worth checking if the official chose an appropriate side of the plot because it needs to be the side of the plot which adjoins the road from which there is an entry to the plot. There is also some room for manoeuvre because the entrance to the plot can be changed before signing the WZ (if there is no direct driveway). For example: if we want the area to be very large because neighbouring plots aren’t built-up areas, only those further located ones are.  Having already a group of plots, an official analyses what the height of the building is in each neighbouring plot. However, he doesn’t go to the area directly to measure it (clerk’s office doesn’t have any land surveyors employed). What he does is to enter the height of the buildings on his map (the data are handwritten with a pen.) The origin of those building height data on the map aren’t quite known to me – probably the official in the land development analysis reports the number of floors in the whole area and the height limit of the buildings – the minimum one and the maximum one. The most important information in this regard is that the listed building heights on the map, which is the basis for the clerk’s analysis, do not match reality. Over 95% of the buildings measured by us (for two cases in Warsaw) are higher in reality than what maps show on the maps in the architectural office.  Maps do not give building heights-  surveyors don’t measure the building’s elevation because  they don’t have such a duty, neither now nor for the previous decades). No height of the building is measured, no 3D cadastral is practised. Only the number of overground and underground levels is entered in the building data sheet. Sometimes, the clerk gives the height of the planned building as an average, but it doesn’t have to be like that. Often the corner buildings which dominate the streets are given values ​​closer to the maximum altitude in the WZ. A lot depends on the clerks here, so the “fight” with them will not lead to anything. In such cases we get average value from the area, and probably investors would like to get maximum values ​​from neighboring buildings.

How to increase the building’s height?

It is vital to obtain  maps from the architectural office; maps where the buildings’ height values ​​are entered manually. Then you have to commission the surveyor to measure each building from the area surveyed by the official. Those buildings which are higher must be presented to the clerk in the form of the measurement. Then the clerk has more choices: he can give us a higher average of the area or we can negotiate the buildings’height closer to the maximum. It’s obvious to conclude how profitable is the possession of, for example, 5 and not 4 storeys or 4 instead of 3.

Example

The recent measurement of buildings in the Ursus area, Spisaka Street and Kosciuszki Street, gave the following discrepancies (ridge measurement):

Spisaka Street 109 office height 12.5m – after actual measuring 13.6m –  1.1m gain

Spisaka Street 111 office height 11.0m – after measuring 13.0m –  2,0m gain

Spisaka Street 113 office height 9.0m – after measuring 10.5m –  1,5m gain

Kościuszki Street 46 height according to office 7.50 – after measuring 8.0m  –  0,5m gain

Those differences result from the following issues:

·         Over the subsequent decades buildings were built up (with or without permits) and architectural departments didn’t change their data,

·         Many buildings (especially in older times) were built higher than it could have been possible- we don’t know how they received technical acceptance or perhaps there was no acceptance at all

·         The measurement of buildings itself, their height on maps in the architectural departments are marked with a “~” sign, which makes it clear that such a measurement differs from reality.

What else is worth checking out during the development process?

Another issue is the number of storeys entered on the map in the Architectural Office. There was often one storey difference between the map and the reality. Therefore, it is worth asking the surveyor to update the map in the context of the number of storeys of the nearest buildings. Please keep in mind that it takes a minimum of 2 months and then the Geodesy Office must pass the updated data to the architectural departments. In addition to the height of the building other things are also worth checking out:

• building area / buildings of nearest plots (extensions, extensions).
• width of the front elevation,• location of buildings on the map / change of the building line,
• surface of the biologically active area / after the construction receipts owners put a paving stone,
• roof geometry,
• shade analysis,
• sunshine analysis.

It is important to keep in mind that the last two points can limit your investment even if you have a maximum height of 15 m on a WZ or even on a local plan. Are you aware that despite the WZ at 15 m you might not be able to use it and you might have to build a much lower building? How is it possible? A building built in accordance with the maximum height might shade adjacent buildings too much and ultimately the height of the building in the project will have to be lowered. It is a very important point that every investor should have in mind already at the stage of buying a plot.

 Monika Hołub

Co-owner Polish Geodetic Group

szkolenia@geodezyjny.com

Tel.: +48 785 041 07

 Adrian Hołub

Co-owner Polish Geodetic Group

adrian.holub@geodezyjny.com

Tel.: +48 608 577 042

Measure it soon!