Land planning for a triangular plot

To whom does one reasonably turn to figure out such a constellation? Preferably by PM, if that is possible.

You cannot (unfortunately in either direction) use forum internal PM yet, but you are welcome to contact me externally, at gmx (de) I have the same name as here.

You cannot use internal forum PMs yet (unfortunately in both directions), but you are welcome to contact me externally, at gmx (de) I have the same name as here.

Thank you very much for the offer. back 2 topic: I would like to exclude the family situation from this thread for now and focus solely on the buildability of the property as such.

I would like to exclude the family situation from this thread for now and limit myself to the buildability of the plot as such.

Unfortunately, from my point of view, the office's response does not give much cause for great hopes – basically only that it is a building plot and that the area desired to be built on is not exempt from this (as is sometimes the case with planting obligation strips, etc.). In terms of the actual floor area ratio utilization, I do not see the remaining whole plot as being so inferior to those in the surrounding area that there would still be room for a whole house (but possibly a separate granny flat). If they still allow you further construction there, I see this, as already suggested, as L-shaped or, as with , possible and quite certainly with only one full storey. I can imagine an extension to the existing building more easily than a second building (the actual building window also indicates this) – and father's granny flat could include the beloved study. Despite crocodile tears over the nice standard land value, I do see some reserves here, but rather none for over 100 sqm in a second building.

To come back to the inquiry with the city: I made it based on the attached image. I had already drawn a possible building volume there. Does that change anything about your fundamental assessment ?

The wording of the response was:
[...] fundamentally, additional buildability appears conceivable under planning law based on § 34 of the Building Code.
To obtain a legally binding statement, I refer to the application procedures building inquiry (clarification of planning law, when querying the height, the involvement of an architect is required) or building permit.
[...]

What is your question now? What do you want to know from the forum?
Whether you need an architect?
Basically yes, and why not already now if you need expert assistance?

To come back to the inquiry at the city: I made it based on the attached image. I had already drawn a possible building structure there.

This excerpt shows too little; for example, the actual building boundary is not recognizable in it.

basically, an additional buildability appears conceivable under planning law based on § 34 Baugesetzbuch.

... means exactly what I already wrote: 1. this is basically a residential building area; also in the projected area; >> building is allowed there; 2. how, how much, and whether the desired is possible would need to be examined more closely.

To obtain a legally binding statement, I refer to the application procedure for building inquiry

German translation: without a fee-based application, we do not use more documents for our response than the attached image. I maintain: 1. I do not see the floor area ratio utilization here significantly below that of the surroundings; 2. I consider the desired ground slab extension and position possible under the above restriction, but not optimally chosen in this form, hence my reference to the Aachen example; 3. if the building authority plays the map of the actual building boundary, I see no independent house in the red outlines, but perhaps six or eight meters of extension to the existing building possible. Development plans (alternatively insertion requirements) also serve to prevent everyone from putting a grown child’s house in the garden ;-)