Inland development (second row)

I correct myself: the city does care about the division after all. In the case of an actual division, the plot ratio must also be correct afterwards.

To shed some light on the matter: - The front plot is 545 sqm in size (just like the rear one) - About 205 sqm of this may not be built on and must be deducted from the plot area for the plot ratio calculation - That leaves 340 sqm of plot or 68 sqm for plot ratio-1 (0.2) - 68 sqm corresponds pretty much exactly to the existing building (I assume otherwise the plot would not have been allowed to be divided) - There are still 34 sqm left for plot ratio-2, but the driveway on the front plot would already be 70 sqm and thus exceed the plot ratio-2; according to building advice, all sealed surfaces are counted 100% towards plot ratio-2 and this also includes gravel/shingle or similar

Accordingly, my concern is that a building encumbrance for right of way on the front plot is not possible at all (due to exceeding plot ratio-2) and thus the rear plot is not buildable. Otherwise, there are already some examples in the neighborhood of rear buildings, but mostly with ideologically divided plots.

Just as thought, I also see it as hopeless.
Apparently, you yourself know how things really work. Were you trying to test us? ;)

The ideally divided properties show how it could work. Houses and paths of both halves would have to be planned and determined beforehand. Borders and rights then divided in such a way that it is sufficient for both again. Everything together must meet the requirements and, of course, the hinterland must also have a building window.

I also have the impression that the guy in front is stumbling through life cluelessly. What kind of guy is that?

Just as I thought, I’m also pessimistic about this. Apparently, you yourself know how things really stand. Were you trying to test us? ;)

The ideologically divided plots show how it could work. Houses and paths on both halves would have to be planned and determined in advance. Boundaries and rights then divided so that it is sufficient for both again. Everything together must meet the requirements and the hinterland must of course also have a building window naturally.

I also have the impression that the person in front is stumbling cluelessly through life. What kind of guy is that?

Let’s put it this way, I was looking for confirmation, since the whole thing didn’t quite make sense in my head ;-) I’m just wondering why the seller already physically divided the plot before the sale without apparently considering the development and accessibility. To me that means: either you agree on an ideologically divided plot (but even then the site coverage ratio is critical) or you submit a building inquiry and initially wait for the result. Smaller exceedances in site coverage ratio-1 and partly larger ones in site coverage ratio-2 seem possible, from what one hears around,

Well, asking at the office doesn't cost anything at first. If necessary, you just change the boundaries until it fits, as long as the wishes remain modest at most. However, the matter does have a certain dubiousness. The house of the person in front is more like a shack and probably not future-proof. If you nail down your rights to this size, I don't know how a judge would view that if he complains in case of need. A certain equivalence of both properties regarding development possibilities could be helpful.

Well, asking questions at the office doesn't cost anything at first.

I left 36€ at the building authority yesterday for the "consultation" :-D A building inquiry also sets us back significantly in terms of time, especially because I was already made to understand that one should not expect feedback within the 3-month period. Currently, it takes much longer.

If you nail down your rights to this size, I don't know how a judge would see that if he complains in a case of need. A certain equivalence of both plots regarding the development possibilities could be helpful.

But that's not my problem, is it? If I buy a plot as offered, I don't have to worry about the buildability of the front plot (apart from the right of way). I do it more in the interest of good neighborhood and to avoid a nasty surprise one day before the notary appointment.

Is there really a development plan with these fixed floor space ratios? Because in my case, it is exactly this constellation, we even have smaller plots (498 + 440) and at the beginning we were also told something about floor space ratios, etc. But since §34 actually applies to us, there are no real floor space ratios; instead, the prevailing development pattern in the neighborhood must be maintained. However, in Berlin, there is also a clear commitment to densification, and with the corresponding surface, paved areas do not count as sealed or only count as 50% or something like that.