Garden house and WEG shared corridor parcel

The design framework is located in the text of the development plan. (Mehrmals) it can be read that garden houses are created project-related by the BT, and further free garden houses are prohibited. The fact that you were contacted again from Hamburg probably has something to do with the many inquiries as well as violations. In this letter as well, the prohibition can be read. As an adult, you should be able to read and understand all these texts. They are written quite simply. Your ignorance towards individual clear sentences and the concept can only be explained by the fact that, stubborn and obstinate, no other words reach you anymore.

Sorry Yvonne, but I find your reaction a bit too harsh. I also did not find any document on the Hamburg website containing the cited design instructions. They do not appear in the legally binding development plan at all. Therefore, I find the question about the legal basis quite legitimate, even if it is a bit too specific for a nationwide forum. Especially in the city-states, the situation is fundamentally different from the "normal" federal states, since there are no municipal statutes, only state laws. In NRW, such design requirements would only be enforceable through a building regulations design statute, which can also be part of a development plan. However, this seems to be an "unofficial" interpretation of the development plan requirements. A phone call to the author of the letter should bring clarity.

Well, Escroda.
This is not the first post from the OP (even though my search didn't find much anymore). Last year, the OP's questions and statements were also very unclear, as far as I remember.

We ourselves have a design framework here.
There isn’t much written in it. But it’s enough. In total, one knows about the concept. And the concept is also included there, namely why and how it was agreed on this or that. The design framework is part of our contract and was accepted by our signature. It may be that in NDS and Hamburg it is dealt with completely differently, it may be that I am completely wrong... but when I read in the justification of over 30 pages that garden houses are built via project construction and no additional ones are allowed, or the OP himself states that “additional garden houses are not permitted,” then that will be the case. But I admit, I only skim read. There are over 30 pages, peppered with reasons why tree A is planted per 4 parking spaces, why the infiltration areas must be built this way, etc.
I find the elaboration basically very coherent, and if one follows the project “Waldquartier am alten Zoll” or the “Oxpark” a bit on the www, one knows about the concept of the neighborhood.
For some, the neighborhood may have too many restrictions, too much sameness and rules; others like exactly that.
The project also has a color concept according to which strict building was done.

I just see: the corresponding link has been deleted again, yet it is available to the OP. And there is also the phone contact listed for questions from the urban planning authority.
It may be that it has already been used. The OP also got a negative answer.
But when I read the initial thread from January, I find it somewhat strange to live in such a neighborhood, i.e. to buy something without having dealt with the concept once and then not to like parts of the house one bought.
It’s certainly unpleasant not to have enough space, I understand that, I write that, but I guess one has to make the best of it.

Sorry if my answer here is a bit unstructured, but I have been struggling with the selection tool in this forum for some time, so I can’t move paragraphs.

In my chest there are two souls. On the one hand, I find it an exaggerated interference with the owner's rights to order him how to build his garden shed or how to paint his roof overhang. Period. Dictatorship of tastes. Today the leader and his people eat stew. On the other hand, I don't like it when people first buy, accept the rules pro forma, but then deliberately start to undermine the supposedly accepted rules. Here on the coast, it is a constant battle with second-home owners from Hamburg who simply start renting out their properties intermittently, even though the zoning plan clearly states that this is excluded. And then you yourself have to go to the authorities and tattle, also stupid. K.

One more thing

A owners' meeting in which we discuss the common areas is not necessarily the occasion to discuss my garden shed.

That is exactly what such an owners' meeting is for.

It may be that the strictness of the rules here would possibly not withstand revision. But it clearly seems to me that the city is of the opinion that the project developer has understood it conceptually; and the circular basically says: hey guys, the garden sheds here are not a first set of tires that everyone should replace with their own individual alloy wheels, they are seriously intended that way. Fischbrötchen is simply not with Mett. You have to be compatible with WEG or choose other forms. Our Homes are our Castles, even if everyone has their "own" plot.