ypg
2016-07-01 09:14:40
- #1
The access to the 2nd house would be guaranteed?
House construction on narrow land? 3-family house already exists
- Erstellt am 2016-06-30 22:50:19
bentek
2016-07-01 10:04:48
- #2
Yes, since the garage would be removed, access by vehicle would also be ensured.
Bauexperte
2016-07-01 10:06:55
- #3
It looks like you - as in almost all cases - have to comply with the bilateral setback areas. The in my opinion only possibility to build on the boundary would be a building encumbrance by the neighbor. Interesting question: will the building authority and the neighbor agree to this?
Are you sure that the plot in question is "only" 9.50 m wide?
Construction expert on the go
bentek
2016-07-01 10:20:03
- #4
Unfortunately, yes, I measured the width of the property by hand yesterday. It is actually only 9.50 meters from the terrace of the house. However, the property is somewhat wider in front, about 13 m. I suspected that. Therefore, one would probably have to keep 2.5 meters on each side, which means you would only have 4.5 m width, which is a bit too little. The property is long (about 70 m long), but it is still suboptimal. Or do you have another idea?
bentek
2016-07-01 10:30:41
- #5
I thought in such a case of a house in this form approximately.
DG
2016-07-01 10:50:55
- #6
Hello, bentek!
Talk to the owners of 111a and 113a. Together, the rear area can be developed - no one can do it alone without building encumbrances or significant restrictions.
You can bring up the topic of building encumbrance, but you will probably not get approval because your own development on 111a or 113a would almost be finished with it, which means nothing else than that the building encumbrance would be very expensive. If I were the owner of 113a, I would roughly squeeze €6K per year (!) from you for the building encumbrance (estimate depending on the property value). In my opinion, you can never earn that additionally with your property, or your property would be dead because of it.
So, land consolidation and reallocation, otherwise in my opinion it won’t work. If you get both neighbors on board, you can also approach the owner of 109, then it gets really good because you can share the development costs and the developable area can be used much better.
Best regards
Dirk Grafe
Talk to the owners of 111a and 113a. Together, the rear area can be developed - no one can do it alone without building encumbrances or significant restrictions.
You can bring up the topic of building encumbrance, but you will probably not get approval because your own development on 111a or 113a would almost be finished with it, which means nothing else than that the building encumbrance would be very expensive. If I were the owner of 113a, I would roughly squeeze €6K per year (!) from you for the building encumbrance (estimate depending on the property value). In my opinion, you can never earn that additionally with your property, or your property would be dead because of it.
So, land consolidation and reallocation, otherwise in my opinion it won’t work. If you get both neighbors on board, you can also approach the owner of 109, then it gets really good because you can share the development costs and the developable area can be used much better.
Best regards
Dirk Grafe