Assessment of building regulations

Hello everyone,

first of all, thank you very much for your numerous inputs.
Our planning or decision for a construction company is hindered by these requirements. We find it difficult to plan something when we do not know how it is allowed to look. Surely, we have the information from the building authority regarding hinterland development, but I do not find any reliable sources for it. Such things are not simply decided in a Monday meeting.

For the front property, the lady from the office refers to the Baunutzungsplan in der Fassung vom 28.12.1960, which still applies here in connection with the urban development regulations of the Bauordnung für Berlin (Bauordnung Bln) von 1958, the Bebauungsplan XIV-A von 1971, and the formally established (f. f.) street and building setback lines as a transferred (qualified) development plan.

In the building permit for the house on the front property from 1991 it states:
"Based on the Building Code for Berlin (Bauordnung Bln) of February 28, 1985, last amended on October 2, 1990, we grant according to the attachments....."

This, however, does not correspond with the current statements from the building authority.

I have looked at the three documents she mentioned and found the following regarding hinterland development:
Bauordnung Bln 1958:
- The maximum building depth, calculated from the compulsory building line on the street side, building boundary, or building setback line, is 20 m for pure and general residential areas in open construction.
- Beyond the limitation specified in no. 1, buildings or parts of buildings may be permitted if urban planning reasons do not oppose it.

The specified development plan refers to explicit paragraphs of the Baunutzungsverordnung dated 26.11.1968 for permissible plot area, floor area, building mass, building boundaries, building depth, structural facilities, and parking spaces.

Regarding building depth it states:
- (3) If a building boundary is set, buildings and parts of buildings must not exceed it. A slight protrusion of building parts may be allowed. Paragraph 2 sentence 3 applies accordingly.
- (4) If a building depth is set, paragraph 3 applies accordingly. The building depth is to be measured from the actual street boundary unless otherwise specified in the development plan.

In terms of dimensions, we would preferably build the same house as in the front (with a dormer and/or 3rd gable). Its eaves height is 4.30 m.
According to the building authority, this is not possible. However, I do not understand to what extent 30 cm makes a difference if the ridge height of the house remains at the specified 8.50 m. The dormer and gable would make the attic a full storey (each 3.68 m long in the planning with a total length of 12.81 m).

Basically, my question is simply on what legal basis these hinterland requirements are based. None of the three documents specify concrete sizes.
In the Bauordnung Bln 1958, only the following paragraph is stated:
- Special design requirements, especially regarding articulation, number of floors, floor height, eaves height, ridge direction, roof design, use of building materials, coloring, cladding, and plastering, may be imposed by legal ordinance on the construction and alteration of buildings on streets and squares of special urban importance.

Is hinterland development considered a square of special urban importance? Then there must be a legal ordinance for the requirements.

Do not get me wrong, I am not seeking a legal dispute in any way here. Nevertheless, we want to build a house that suits us without having to make endless compromises.
It costs an incredible amount of time and nerves to find a building partner. The first plans are always nice and good, but they do not help us if I cannot realize them.
We do not know how to proceed now. Sign a contract based on a plan that might not even be approved? Make a lot of compromises even though the house might have been able to meet our wishes better?

Thank you again for your time and effort in helping me understand the whole thing.

The whole thing makes me a bit angry as a third party when reading it.
Fact is: According to the development plan, you are not allowed to build there at all.
Fact is: The office accommodates the builder with an uncomplicated exception regulation, no new development plan, nothing.
In return, the office demands restrictions in the way of building, fully aware that otherwise you can expect lawsuits from the neighbors, which you will lose, because as said, according to the development plan it would be zero nada niente. Instead of thanking the office and planning as intended, the builder makes a fuss. Give a little finger, and he takes the whole hand. I have no understanding for such things. Karsten

Dear Karsten,

Thank you also for your reply. I am not taking the whole hand, I am informing myself. That may be a personal shortcoming, but I am very structured with such matters and, as said, like to be informed.
We are aware that a house that can be built with these conditions would by no means be a dump, and solutions can also be found for a low knee wall.
Nevertheless, one hopefully only invests a not insignificant sum in a house construction once in a lifetime and would accordingly like to make few compromises.

I simply want to know on which legal basis these conditions are founded. Nothing more and nothing less.

General contractors are often overwhelmed by something like this. A real architect would certainly be more sensible.

This is now the 3rd post about the same problem. Maybe you could say something more precise about what you are planning. What is the height structure of your desired house? How high is the base slab? How high is it above the ground? Can it possibly be sunk even further? What room heights / floor heights are planned? How large are dormers / cross-gables or similar? Can the knee wall be higher if the roof structures are omitted? Exact floor plans and wishes, where are the problems, land, budget, neighbors, the dog's name - simply everything. Then you can also look for solutions. Forever rowing against the building authority won't get you anywhere. You have to build according to the development plan, not against it.

Dear Katja, Our desired house would be a two-story building, which is supposedly not possible. Therefore, we want a house with exterior dimensions similar to the one on the front plot. 9.50 x 13.xx, gable roof with 42° slope, no basement, with a 3rd gable and dormer to gain space, eaves height 4.30 m, total height 8.50 m. Room height on the ground floor preferably 2.60 m, on the upper floor 2.50 m. Regarding the base slab and roof structures, I have no idea.

Are 2 full floors permitted according to the development plan of the front property?

Are 2 full floors allowed according to the development plan of the front property?

According to the building authority, the land use plan dated 28.12.1960 applies there, which states the following:
- general residential area
- building stage II/2
- number of floors 2
- buildable area (floor area ratio) 0.2
- floor space index 0.4
- BMZ 1.6