Are easements being ignored by the future neighbor?

2021-08-20 20:37:43

Filling plots with the highest possible amount of square meters of sellable space is exactly what architects appreciated by investors are "trained" for. They have internalized this mindset; for them, it already runs as an automatic program. "Misplanning" is a socially critical interpretation.

Yes, I then have to deal with such "architects" professionally...
They regularly manage, due to maximizing living space, that HVAC riser shafts in residential construction resemble a route through an old town rather than running straight through all floors.
The only important criterion is how to maximize the living space even at the second decimal place. :rolleyes:

When it comes to soundproofing regarding wastewater and other issues, they then look at you like a deer caught in headlights. :eek:

2021-08-31 11:56:59

Just got back from the conversation with the builders and my parents.

We were able to agree and everything is taking its course. ;)

The one carport (which is directly on the driveway) will be moved so that my parents can exercise their right of way. The other carports (within the 3m strip with the building prohibition) remain as planned. In return, they will cover the costs to plant a hedge on our property so that we get a visual barrier.

All good. :D

2021-09-02 13:52:06

To revisit the point of neighbor participation for the sake of completeness:

Please read VG Würzburg, judgment of 28.05.2019 – W 4 K 18.671.

As well as VGH München, decision of 09.01.2018 – 9 C 17.88.

The administrative court correctly assumed that a defective or even completely missing participation of the neighbor contrary to Art. 66 BayBO – and thus also a violation of Art. 66 para. 1 sentence 1 BayBO – cannot help the plaintiff’s application for legal aid succeed. This neighbor participation is a means for the authority to inform itself as thoroughly as possible about the facts relevant to the decision; however, the protective purpose does not lie in safeguarding the participation rights themselves. This provision does not serve neighbor protection (see BayVGH, decision of 28.1.2016 – 9 ZB 12.839 – juris para. 7; decision of 6.2.2017 – 15 ZB 16.398 – juris para. 17). A neglected neighbor participation solely has the consequence that the building permit notice must be served on the neighbor pursuant to Art. 66 para. 1 sentence 6 BayBO, whereby this service triggers the deadline for filing a lawsuit (see BayVGH, decision of 6.2.2017 op. cit. juris para. 17).

The amendment from this year does not seem to have changed the legal situation significantly. Jurisprudence will therefore continue to apply unchanged.

Also see the synopsis of the amendment (source City of Munich):

2021-09-03 17:19:13

I would certainly give the opponent ONE (singular!!!) chance for a peaceful withdrawal.

Sorry for the off-topic, but: what would be the plural of "eine"? :oops:

2021-09-03 17:34:17

Two, three, (...), thousands, ... chances. Or simply several

2021-09-03 21:43:23

Sorry for off-topic, but: what would be the plural of "eine"?

I could also have written: "EINE chance for a peaceful retreat I would certainly give the opponent." Unfortunately, bold text hasn't been working here for some time now. I still wanted to emphasize that I didn't mean "one and another and another ..."

Are easements being ignored by the future neighbor?

matte

matte

Apolyxo

stefan_baut

Tolentino

11ant