Equipment shed on a non-buildable boundary. May I do it?

Hello dear builders,

At the beginning of the year, we wanted to build a 4x4m garden house on our property at the property boundary, but we were stopped by the city because, according to the development plan, it is located on a non-buildable area.
In our opinion, the legal basis in Bavaria is on our side, because both the Land Use Ordinance, as well as MBO and BayBO, allow construction with a total length of up to 9m, an average height of up to 3m, and a volume of up to 75 m3 and are also exempt from approval.
According to the Land Use Ordinance Section 5 § 23, outbuildings within the meaning of §14 can be built on non-buildable property areas if nothing else is specified in the development plan. We could not find any further notes in the development plan that explicitly prohibit an outbuilding. Outbuildings include, among other things, tool sheds and small animal husbandry. The construction of an outbuilding smaller than 75m3 is also exempt from approval if it does not contradict the development plan.
In our opinion, the garden house/tool shed is possible and exempt from approval according to building law.
Is there perhaps another aspect that gives the city the right to forbid us from building an outbuilding on our property or to require approval?
The neighbors also wanted to build a garden house at the boundary. Now they have given up and are building a pool instead. We have already had a base plate made at this location, so I do not want to give up my plan.

Am I allowed to build a garden house without a living room at the property boundary on the non-buildable area?[ATTACH alt="image003.jpg" type="full"]48868[/ATTACH]

Thank you very much for your opinions.

however, we were prevented from doing so by the city

How am I supposed to imagine this prevention? Personal oral/remote oral/written prohibition? What was the reason for the authority's intervention?

According to Baunutzungsverordnung Section 5 § 23, ancillary facilities in the sense of §14 can be built on non-buildable property areas,

This is not a binding decision, but one made in accordance with due discretion, i.e. the municipality can also refuse the approval. However, the weighing process must be explained and the decision justified.

since according to the development plan it is located on a non-buildable area.

This reasoning is not sufficient to demonstrate a weighing process.

In the development plan we could not find any further remarks explicitly prohibiting an ancillary facility.

I am always skeptical of such statements, as I cannot assess the knowledge of the person making the claim. If you want an assessment by the forum, you must provide forum members with an opportunity to investigate themselves, e.g. by providing images of the complete development plan including textual provisions or, for plans available online, by indicating the source (no link!).

I have heard something similar from an acquaintance south of Stuttgart. He is also not allowed to build over a part of his garden because there is a pipeline or similar, or a supply line (I think military) underneath. I couldn't believe it, but who says that's not true. Directly inquire at the office, there are reasons for that.

I know the problem. We solve it with a shepherd's wagon because you are allowed to park trailers.

Thank you very much for the responses, I will try to explain it in more detail

How am I supposed to imagine this prohibition? Personal oral/remote oral/written prohibition? What was the reason for the authority’s intervention?

One reason for the intervention was a chance walk by the official, who had just seen the foundation slab being laid and then asked what we intended to do. Then he marked it on a piece of paper and later sent us the following by email:

"The planned garden shed on your property at the boundary to the properties Lahnbergblick 18, 20, 24 lies outside the building boundaries set in Development Plan No. 4 (§ 9 para. 1 no. 2 Federal Building Code, § 23 Building Use Ordinance). The valid qualified development plan “Hochgericht II” does not provide for any buildings or structural facilities in this area. Non-buildable property areas are marked white in the development plan, buildable areas are marked light red. On the non-buildable areas (white), e.g. vegetable beds, lawn areas or trees/hedges/bushes are possible. Non-fixed garden furniture is also conceivable. But no structural facilities connected to the earth and made of building products are allowed, and your planned garden shed counts as such."

So the prohibition was made by email.

I am always skeptical of such statements because I cannot assess the knowledge of the person making the claim. If you want an evaluation by the forum, you must give the forum participants the opportunity to search for themselves, e.g. by providing pictures of the complete development plan including textual provisions or, in the case of plans available online, by specifying the source (no link!).

The development plan as a PDF is available online on the website of the municipality of Bad Königshofen im Grabfeld, development area Hochgericht II

Development plan – image:

This justification is not sufficient to prove a balancing of interests.

We have not received any other clarification so far. I have really tried to find a reason for the prohibition. The city repeatedly referred us by email to the above-mentioned laws. About a month ago, we sent an inquiry including a complaint to the Committee for Building Affairs and the mayor. So far we have not received any response. Now we have an expensive foundation slab on the property boundary, which I would somehow like to use.

I heard something similar from an acquaintance south of Stuttgart. He is not allowed to build over part of his garden there because there is a pipeline or the like below, or a supply line (I think military). I couldn’t believe it but who says that it’s not true.
Ask directly at the office, they have reasons for that.

We have no lines here, previously this was agricultural land.

I know the problem. We solve it with a shepherd’s wagon, because trailers are allowed to be parked.

The same occurred to me.
For this circus wagon we also received the following rejection by email:
"Regarding the proposal with the ‘caravan’ I can tell you the following. A structural facility is present if it is connected to the earth and made of building materials. Accordingly, your foundation slab already counts as a structural facility. A connection to the earth exists if the facility, for example, is firmly connected to the property by a foundation. It also exists if the facility rests on the property due to its own weight and cannot be moved without technical aids."

PS: Sorry for the grammatical mistakes, I am not a native German speaker.

The neighbors also wanted to build a garden shed on the border. Now they have given up and are building a pool instead.

Smart, fits much more anyway. And just throwing the stuff from the edge of the basin down saves work.

SCNR