Building and open space in the outer area

Dear house building forum community,

I discovered a plot of land in the course of a foreclosure auction; this morning I had several phone calls and was able to obtain some information, but unfortunately there are still further questions open.

I have (not yet) reviewed the appraisal report. In the land use plan, the area is designated as areas for agriculture.



In the district court’s decision, the areas are divided into four parcels.
The largest area of approximately 1800 sqm is designated as building and open space, recreational area.
The other three areas (approx. 200 sqm) are only designated as building and open space.

Additional information: "This concerns a single-family house (conversion of a shed into a farmworker’s house). The conversion to a residential house took place around 1975. Living area approx. 80 sqm. Two greenhouses stand on the property. The property is located outside the built-up area.

Can one also assume a potentially private use here?

I talked a lot on the phone today and unfortunately did not get a final answer, except that if something has been “re-zoned,” as with the residential house here, one can generally assume that permission would have to have been granted for it. (Otherwise the appraisal would state that the object would have to be demolished). The designation of the land use plan as areas for agriculture speaks against this.

Do you perhaps have other hints and/or ideas?

Thank you in advance for your efforts. If you need any other information, please let me know!

You can use it privately if you operate a farm or another privileged business there. Everything else will be very difficult.

I see it the same way as . In outdoor areas, you need good relations with the municipality to rezone it.

Thank you for your answers.

I was there earlier to take a look, and there is definitely no sign of an agricultural operation, rather overgrown land. The house itself was definitely inhabited.

So why is a residential house allowed to stand there, which is officially referred to as such in the report?

That doesn't quite make sense to me. So in your opinion, no chance?

The property, etc., is really wonderful!

If someone once operated a farm there, but for example got old and had no heir to continue it, the 'old farmer' or for example his widow may also continue living there. But when selling, that no longer applies. Just Google a bit about building in the outer areas. The principle is: building is NOT allowed in the outer areas. Then there are exceptions, such as farming, gravel pits, nurseries, etc. Some manage, after a lot of discussion with the authorities, to continue using or even renovating existing buildings. New construction almost never happens. But it is always a long and annoying process that is rarely successful.

How high is the purchase price? That often answers the question.

You write: "(Ausbau von einem Schuppen zum Landarbeiterhaus) The conversion to a residential house took place around 1975."

Landarbeiterhaus is eligible for approval.

If the use is no longer agricultural, demolition threatens.

New construction only with justified appropriate use. For example, you could breed alpacas.