Adjustment of land use plan - impacts for property owners

Hello,

the following situation: We own a plot of land near the development boundary, a recreational or garden plot which is also used accordingly. The plot borders residential areas to the east and south, and the main road through the town to the north.

The neighboring owner to the west, who also owns such a plot, has contacted the city/municipality to request an adjustment of the land use plan for his plot so that it can be developed. He intends to sell it as a building plot. Development should not be a problem since it is located directly on the road (electricity/sewage/access).

The following questions arise for me:
What is the procedure within the administration?
Does this automatically apply to our plot as well?
What can I expect as a landowner? (General costs, increased property tax, etc.)
Development on our part is currently not intended, but a long-term option.

We own a plot of land near the development boundary, a recreational or garden plot which is also used accordingly. The plot borders a residential area to the east and south, and the main road through the village to the north. The owner to the west, who also owns such a plot, has inquired with the city/municipality about adjusting the land use plan for his property so that it can be developed. He intends to sell it as building land.

I interpret the description as your plot lying between the residential area and the neighboring plot, which is intended to be included in the residential area.

What is the procedure within the administration? Does this automatically apply to our plot as well? What can I expect as a property owner? (General costs, increased property tax, etc.)

The municipal administration will probably have to approach the district office to expand the building land area into the current garden land area. Afterwards, they can initiate the amendment procedure for the development plan to expand its spatial scope. Your plot (if I understood correctly that it lies in between) would then also become building land. With unchanged use as a garden plot, I see no change for you in terms of taxes. However, you will likely be subject to local charges if the road is extended accordingly. Cleaning fees for the sidewalk in front of your garden will also likely be charged to you. Of course, you will be involved in the development plan amendment procedure and entitled to file objections. However, your reluctance does not mean the project will fail. Potentially, your plot would also increase in value. In this respect, it would probably be unreasonable to be angry at the neighbor for now incurring additional fees for you soon. You can start saving now; the notices will not come before 2023.

The owner directly to the west, ..., has inquired with the city/municipality about adjusting the land use plan ... so that his property can be developed. He intends to sell it as building land. ...

...
What can I expect as a property owner? (General costs, increased property tax, etc.)
We currently do not intend to develop the property ourselves, but in the long term, it is an option.

I see two sensible courses of action:

- If there is POTENTIALLY long-term demand for building land: be glad that someone else is pushing this through

It would be stupid if you want to build in 15 years – and THEN, because there are already a dozen 70s houses empty that should be renovated first, no new building land is designated!

- If you want a RECREATIONAL property PERMANENTLY, look for a new (cheap) one and sell the building land expensively!
That should yield a decent five-figure profit, right?

thank you for your explanations.

Correct, our property lies directly in between. I interpret it now that, in case of emergency, they will approach us as property owners.

I do not see a street extension as necessary. The street to the north is a district road and the property/properties border directly on it.

Define reluctance? In general, I have absolutely nothing against it and I am also “not upset” with the neighbor. Therefore, I also agree with : having is better than needing.

I am mainly interested in whether fees arise for the procedure due to the reclassification to building land as well as possible follow-up costs.

I am mainly interested in whether fees arise for the procedure due to the reclassification to building land, as well as possible follow-up costs.

At least higher follow-up costs are impending. So far maybe real estate tax A, later real estate tax B or even C.