Land development rejected

Why it all took so long, I don’t know myself.

A short letter to the mayor who then forwards the application to the administration.

Due to insults, unauthorized entry onto my property, and a fence we lawfully erected because the nice neighbor stored his wood etc. there, we are going back and forth with the lawyer, and now also a mediator.

It is still in the outer area after all.

I also don’t want to be defeated by the neighbor.

I do. Well, not know but suspect. Through the 2017 amendment of the Building Code with the addition of §13b in the wake of the so-called refugee crisis, the administration hoped for a simpler procedural process by not supplementing the existing inner development statute but by making use of the new paragraph. That was obviously a misjudgment.

Sounds like an offer from Don Vito Corleone.

Well then the fog is slowly clearing. Someone in politics seems to be better networked than you.

No. There is an inner development statute, but it ends exactly at the desired building plot. The administration initially wanted to expand the area of application before the Building Code opened the seemingly simpler path. So they switched and initiated the development plan procedure, which the local council and municipal council initially supported unanimously (!).
IMHO, without interpersonal abysses, a win-win solution could have been possible.
[ATTACH alt="Lageplan.png"]63426[/ATTACH] The neighbors to the west exchange a narrow strip within the statute area for a large area in the southwest of their property. The building project moves 20m closer to the street, making development more cost-effective.

The chance for rational exchange of ideas seems to be over. Thus, two winners become three losers.

As far as I have read here now, no one has a concrete solution ready for me.

If you want something, you just have to engage with it, familiarize yourself with it, and take care of it. Standing there and saying 'well, how am I supposed to know that?' is pretty useless. You will have to resolve it either interpersonally or legally. So far, you have not demonstrated the ability to do the former here.

But how is one supposed to know all that if one doesn't even know what options one would have had and how one should have proceeded better.

Well, that's all fine and dandy now, but I still only understand half of what you all are writing.