Neighbor objects after approved building application

Stay calm and don't panic. Your future neighbor is just a complete idiot who probably didn't take the boundary too seriously or doesn't want the noise or thinks a disability is contagious. Go to a lawyer and get this sorted out. You will get your house. Nothing is as bad as it seems. Have an ice cream with your children.

Everything is at stake, even the future of our disabled child, because of whom we are building this.

Sorry, Nicole. But that's nonsense. Even if the neighbor could enforce a legitimate interest, then the plans would just have to be redone. But that's not the end of the world and it certainly doesn't affect the future of your child. So really, just stay calm now.

I'm really very sorry.

Yes, me too. Too many contradictions in the facts, too many clichés, too little response to the meaningful contributions.

that said neighbors are reading along here

If they were doing that, they would certainly have recognized the case already. You have already published the site plan, unfortunately an outdated one, the development plan is anyway a public document – so where does the sudden change of heart come from?

and then twist it against us.

I would find a shoe good. But since you don’t get legal advice here, only assessments and opinions from people with more or less expertise, from which maybe a tendency could be derived, the neighbor will hardly succeed in finding a useful string to pull. At least you could have clarified the discrepancies. This way, once again my paranoia about invented threads is fueled.

Hello

I feel the same way.
So far it says:

evil neighbor
disabled child
understanding building authority
And otherwise nothing concrete.

I really don't know what it is actually about.
Reflect within yourself whether there really is a "neighbor" problem, or if you hold the solution to the problem.

Steven

At least you could have clarified the discrepancies. This once again fuels my paranoia about invented threads.

Just because someone doesn't want to reveal everything about themselves doesn't mean the thread is invented.....

: I assume your 70-year-old neighbor probably won't be reading this here

By the way, I read the plan like this: public area on the right, so the setback area may fall here, but if that is another building plot, you are not allowed to do that.
On the left side of the picture is the neighbor who still wants to build a garage and can and may build it exactly on the boundary, just as yours normally could.

Only the embankments directly affect the neighbor, but we can't say anything about that because we don't know how high his property is raised compared to yours.

As far as I know, there is an objection period of 1 month. Once that has expired, he can't do anything anymore in my opinion....

Just because someone doesn’t want to reveal everything about themselves

It’s not about revealing everything, but correcting what has already been disclosed. What’s the point of posting an outdated site plan from which the alleged deviations do not emerge, except for the roof pitch, where I wonder why a reduction of the roof pitch by 6° should be beneficial to accessibility.

however, if it is another building plot you are not allowed to do it that way.

Yes, if the neighbor has agreed to a building encumbrance.

and this can and may be exactly on the boundary

Which still has to be verified. According to the site plan, he has filled up to 2.8m and wants to put a garage on it. That would probably exceed the scope of the privileging conditions.

but we can’t say anything about that because we don’t know how high his property is filled compared to yours.

The elevations are in the site plan. Whether the original poster actually wants to fill 3.6m (!) in the north remains unclear due to the outdated plan, as does the planned terrain modeling in the boundary area.

So far, I know of an objection period of 1 month.

There you say it yourself. The neighbor cannot make an objection any longer after more than three months.

Change is submitted to the building authority (but was originally approved this way).

Presumably, the original poster has applied for amendments to the building permit. The neighbor was involved (too high retaining wall) and has raised objections. Hence also the limited calming effect of the posts referring to the parties involved in contesting the building permit, namely the neighbor and the building authority. Incidentally, the original poster’s architect let slip to the neighbor that he cannot build his garage if he does not agree to the 3.6m high retaining wall. And thus the neighborhood dispute is there.

Even if not everything is fabricated, there are plenty of inconsistencies, starting from the engaged (#1) or to be engaged lawyer (#60) to the illegible, outdated site plan to the barrier-free bungalow on a sloping plot with more than 6m height difference.