Location of city villa or single-family house on 500 m2 plot - rectangular

What is also unclear to me: Who actually pays for the path to the rear building? And who pays for the land? Actually, it should be 100% attributed to the rear building. What does the front building have to do with it? It has zero benefit from it.

The price for the GFL right has presumably already been paid by the neighbor at some point to the current or former owner of Tolentino’s desired plot -> included in the purchase price of the property.

Tolentino can still be glad if this strip also belongs to him. He can use it as an access path and does not have to keep a 3-meter distance from it, as would be the case with someone else’s property.

What I still haven't understood (or maybe I just have a different opinion) is why it is better to have two smaller strips in front of and behind the house than one somewhat larger one in front. In my imagination, the larger contiguous area gives more openness and also more possibilities.

Basically, you are right. It's more about the fact that you are not allowed to place anything on the strip in front. If not even parking spaces are allowed, then probably no carport, shed, or any kind of tent either. That means bicycles, cars, and mowers have to be accommodated elsewhere, and the other side is suitable for that since edge development would be possible there. With a house width of 11m, you would otherwise only have 2.30m for the car, which in my opinion is too little. Of course, the house could be narrower, but then you lose depth in the garden again. But maybe let's wait first to see if you even have a chance to get the land?

The advantage of
[IMG

https://www.hausbau-forum.de/attachments/platzierung2-jpg.42082/[/IMG]

compared to




[*]free positioning of the entrance door (whether north or west)
[*]the 4m distance to the north should also be maintained .. definitely, so that you can make the turn onto the parking space. Alternatively:
[LIST]
[*]clarify whether a carport is allowed on the GFL-right area at the end ... unlike the garage, it does not have a floor slab


[*]questionable whether a shelter is allowed in the 5m strip .. in Katja's version, you could definitely build a shed on the boundary behind the right parking space
[*]with Katja, it is also pleasant to sit in the west/northwest with a hedge ... evening sun in summer

My approach was like this, technology under the roof (although the house might be just a touch too big):

that the property also has an impact on the floor plan

... is undoubtedly true, and restrictions are good to know and mention. But making them more or less the motto of floor plan development seems to me to reverse the chicken-and-egg sequence - just like with

But if you say that it is actually super easy...

my "don’t get caught in additional shackles" being misinterpreted as "without additional shackles it magically happens by itself."

That wasn’t meant that way. “Buddy” isn’t an affair, is it? It was an expression of the fact that they probably know what works and what doesn’t.

If they aren’t flirting with each other today, but merely went to the movies together in school, this connection is even less reliable for your purposes than I thought.

Yes, I’m afraid the TE underestimates the number of tricycles, bicycles, mowers, garden chairs, weeders, and much more that would all like to have a small shed right next to the parking space afterwards.

Come on, guys, you’re making a mistake in reasoning!

At the top of the plan is the 3m GWL right, which I can also drive on. So I could turn in there after all

I didn’t mean parking on the strip, but using the strip itself as an access road and parking behind the house. Because there you could build a paved parking space on the property boundary.

I’m with @ltenzer, but I would put both parking spaces together behind the house and design the house as a rectangle:

You can’t assume that on 3 meters width you can park at 90 degrees. That’s not possible unless you add another meter and take 5 minutes each time to crank.
Or use a crane.
However, I don’t understand why one is fixated on the square shape: you can fit 3 children’s rooms better in a rectangular shape, and that is easily doable here.