§34 Building Code: Building Window and Garage

Yes, good idea. However, my crystal ball says that the future homeowners don't want that.

If it's the only option..., why not?! :)

The 34 is not a free pass, but it is not inflexible either. Our house is located further back and the ridge direction does not fit either.

Our community is fighting for growth, does not want donut villages, and was long under an ecological banner but has now switched to "ihre Kinderlein-Kommet."

Consider arguments about which advantages arise for the community.
- two families
- no development costs
- gap in the building development closed
etc

I find Ypg’s idea charming.

What does the surrounding area look like?

Good morning and many thanks for the numerous responses!

First of all, a big SORRY that I chose the excerpt so small. The building authority employee told me that, in his opinion, only the houses shown in the excerpt are to be considered for the assessment. I have now attached 2 larger excerpts in the attachment. 1x an aerial photo and 1x a section from the property map.

One more quick note: For the house at the back, if part of it is more than 50m away from the street, a fire department staging area (12mx7m) is required.

Thanks for that! I had not considered that at all so far! That would of course be very unfortunate...

Yes, good idea. However, my crystal ball says that the future homeowners will not want that.

Exactly, a semi-detached house is not an option.
Basically, it’s about the fact that I would like to build a residential house on the street and the entire area of 2,200 m² is way too large. Also regarding property maintenance and recurring fees... That’s why I’m currently exploring possible options so that a fantastic plot could be created in the rear area of the property that can then be offered for sale.

From the previous research and also the answers here, I suspect that a residential house in the second row will not be approved and if so, it will be associated with a lot of effort (cost-wise and organizationally).

Positioning the garage outside the building window would still be an alternative with which I might still be able to manage.
can you please explain the statement "currently no" in more detail?

The 34 is not a free pass, but not inflexible either. Our house is further back and the ridge direction also does not fit.

Our community is striving for growth, does not want donut villages, and was long under ecological flag but has now switched to its “children come” policy.

Think about arguments which bring advantages to the community.
- two families
- no development costs
- gap closure
etc

That is exactly how I understood our mayor as well. However, I suspect that the final word here lies with the building authority, right?
I will present the mentioned arguments exactly like this in another phone call.

We went to the mayor and told him roughly what we planned, later submitted the plan, at some point the approval came. Whether the municipality intervened, no idea. They want influx, they don’t want empty village centers, the eyesore was gone. However, I have to say we would never have built like this 10 years ago. The mayor and municipal council at that time were so conservative. Yes, no change in the village appearance.

Look to the right on the site plan (plot number unfortunately cannot be read, below the large property), there is apparently a development in the second row, with its own access, as planned here as well. Maybe this can be referred to.

I have now attached 2 larger excerpts in the attachment.

Congratulations - that’s how fast it goes to dispel my concerns that this could also be an outdoor area :)