11ant
2021-07-16 18:01:35
- #1
Such boundaries are not that uncommon here, especially because boundaries between actual interior and exterior areas are oriented to the settlement, no matter how far a parcel extends beyond that into the prairie. In the specific case – as said, I only assume this, so I do not derive this from established facts – I base myself on the appearance that the statement that this boundary represents the transition between an interior and an exterior area is just a case of excessive anticipatory obedience. Because just like in your example, the boundaries between a currently planned area and its future neighbor typically look like that. The planned area does not necessarily have to mean the scope of an official development plan in this sense, but here possibly only that of a design statute. Because we also encounter that regularly here: areas in which, on the one hand, only §34 is applied, so no fully fledged formal development plan, but still requirements for building lines or even facade divisions, most starkly here:I myself have already wondered about this seemingly arbitrary boundary,
The street-side arrangement of ribbon windows is not permitted. Window openings must be separated from each other by pillars at least 0.24m wide.