OBTAINING A BUILDING PERMIT
1. to simplify the spatial planning legislation, to define concepts, terms for the whole country, to make the forms of spatial planning acts the same everywhere.2. to change the administrative procedure for obtaining a building permit. The building permit must be issued within 30 days, on the basis of a master file with general consents or connection consents. It should be mandatory for all to issue these consents, with no special requirements for additional plans, etc. At this stage of the building procedure, it would be sufficient for the investor to obtain only the owners' consents for the construction of utility connections, or to somehow reorganise the need for easements. This matter is now causing problems. Water, electricity, roads, etc. run on private land and for each connection to this infrastructure (which is mandatory) the investor must have easements... Simplify this in the first phase, as these procedures for obtaining easements take too long.3. In the second phase, submit to the UE the PZI documentation, with the "right to build" and all for the administrative authority to approve the start of construction. It is only checked if the project has all the components (architecture, statics, electrical and mechanical installations, etc.), just to make some forms. The UE notifies the inspector when work starts, and all inspectorates (building, labour, market) are notified.4. Raise the administrative fees so that even an official who works well and quickly can have a certain amount. Set a certain norm, above which he is entitled to an allowance. A client who gets a permit in 30 days will be happy to pay a few euros more.5. Make it possible to legalise buildings, give work to designers, surveyors... Make this process cheaper and make a special procedure for legalisation!6. Raise the penalties for black builders after the change in legislation.
 
1. Spatial planning:Why is it possible that each municipality and municipal regulation (PUP or OPN) has its own definitions of terms and technical terms, which are not necessarily always defined in the same way, thus causing confusion and errors. For example, almost everywhere the attic is defined as a living loft, but in the MOL it is the floor that is actually above the attic and is entirely under a pitched roof, etc. Each municipality tries to be "clever" and define terms according to who is making these zoning acts-which company. I propose that the law should make it compulsory to use the terminology nationwide, as this will make it easier for everyone involved. The terms are indeed defined in the law on the construction of buildings, but when designing you have to take into account the provisions of the zoning act, and then problems arise.... The use of the same concepts and terms would facilitate the work of all designers and improve the working conditions in the whole of Slovenia.The spatial planning acts should also be standardised, or there should be precise forms of what they should look like and exactly what they should contain, because now it is up to the designer to put it in what form and so on. This all increases the design time, then the possibility of mistakes and confusion.2. Project documentation, consents, administrative fees, etc...:Here the matter should be made more simple and the PGD phase should be only an administrative phase, as it actually is. The officials are not experts in the field of construction, they do not have sufficient knowledge and therefore the volume of documentation is quite unnecessary and only prolongs and worsens the situation in the area. The procedure is purely administrative, and the project documentation, which in the first phase should only consist of location data and some basic consents, such as whether there is infrastructure on the site or something similar, should be adapted accordingly. What is happening today is that the consenting authorities are blackmailing their 'colleagues' by drawing up special plans, called connection plans. Why should I have a grid connection plan at the PGD stage of the documentation if it is purely a matter of implementation and has no place in the administrative procedure. This is the work of Elektro Ljubljana, which refuses to issue any more connection consents at the PGD documentation stage, in violation of the law.The building permit should be issued within 30 days. That should be the goal. The customer would also be willing to pay more to the State for such a service, through the administrative fee. It should be made compulsory to allow the more active officials in this field to be paid an allowance, which they would get through the administrative fee. So those who issue more licences per month would get a larger amount. The procedure should be standardised so that it is not complicated, because there is always and everywhere an official who knows how to make life difficult. And the superiors know this, and then, through the selection of work or projects, they determine which ones they will deal with. In practice, this means that ordinary people almost always get these officials, while the more "lively" ones do the so-called bigger projects, the projects of acquaintances of heads of departments, etc. The basic problem is people and bureaucratic thinking. Clear boundaries and responsibilities need to be set. There should also be the possibility of some kind of appeal against the work, which does not just mean an appeal against an administrative act, because in practice no investor wants that, as it will delay the matter. It would be good, however, to have a place where these complaints could be collected, so that the work of officials could be monitored.As planners, we often see how an official is doing things wrong, but we do not really have the leverage to "rebel", but rather to bow our heads, to correct things, to complete things, all in order to satisfy the client and to finish the job.As I said, to trim the project so that at this stage it contains only the planning conditions and general consents, and then to get the building permit and, with the PZI projects, to get the approval from the UE to start construction. This would force the use of PZI projects, which are not currently used.The first stage is therefore a quick, simple building permit, then the submission of the PZI documentation and the approvals of the consenting authorities who have approved these projects as an application to start construction. The administrative unit only checks whether all the components are in place and the responsible designers should be held accountable for the content. The administrative authority shall then register the start of construction and notify the inspection body of the start date and all the necessary information. It should be made compulsory to enter the building in the cadastre and to obtain a certificate of occupancy, which should become the responsibility of the person taking over the business, so that anyone who takes over the design, construction, etc. should ensure that this is the case. So I would charge for this service from the outset. Increase the penalties for offenders. Before that, make it compulsory to legalise all construction, in some kind of summary administrative procedure, so that the designers and surveyors have the job. This would solve the crisis in this area, because a lot of people are out of work.That is to say, make the existing situation, draw it up in the cadastres, etc., and the administrative unit will again just confirm that all the ingredients are there. This legalises the building. This procedure must be attractive to everyone, because already today many buildings can be legalised and there is no interest. Therefore, make it attractive to legalise and, after a certain time limit, punish everyone severely. Set a minimum fine of EUR 10 000-20 000 and then compulsory demolition.