Preliminary building approval positive, building application criticized position

Until now, the orientation of the house was planned parallel to the building line on the street side. An orientation along the northern building line, as suggested above, is definitely an option.

I would like to throw into the room here that building lines are mandatory to build on, whereas building limits only restrict the building area.

Here is an excerpt from the draft development plan, according to my understanding there are only building envelopes/building boundaries. No mandatory building line. (Plot 47/4 before the new survey) Since the draft development plan is not legally binding yet and is completely neglected by the building authority. (Although the building permit states that all stipulations of the draft development plan must be observed) I will try to clarify by phone which distance to the street etc. is desired by the authority. ‍♀️

Attached is a cadastral map,

Nice, diagonally opposite commercial and nearby open space. What is actually the justification for the establishment of a development plan here – could the obstacle perhaps already lie here? What are the red LED strips or the purple-checkered border supposed to mean?

I would like to suggest that building lines require construction on them, whereas building boundaries only restrict the building area.

This does not apply in §34 areas.

I will try to clarify by phone what distance to the street etc. is desired by the authorities.

This is not a wishful thinking in any federal state – not even for the building authority. I am not sure if you have noticed my remark; the background of the lengthy establishment process could be interesting. The compensation of the personnel secondment from the building to the health authorities for corona contact tracing should now be fully completed. If a plan is still being established so sluggishly, this speaks for headwind from somewhere. Is the municipal council fragmented and/or is the district administrator from the mayor's opposing party?

Since the draft development plan is not yet legally binding and is completely neglected by the building authority. (Although the building permit notice states that all stipulations of the draft development plan must be observed)

I see two completely different processes. 1. You submit a preliminary building inquiry based on the not yet legally binding development plan. This preliminary inquiry is answered positively. 2. You submit a building application based on the currently valid building regulations. This building application is rejected. What are you upset about? What is the building authority supposed to do? Ignore applicable law? As it happened to you, this is completely okay and normal. It's like going to the VW dealership and asking if you could buy the new Passat coming out in autumn. The answer is: Yes (in autumn). Now you go back to the dealership and sign a purchase contract for a Passat being produced right now and wonder why it is not the upcoming model from autumn. Of course, it can't be, as only the old model is available now.

In §34-Gebieten gilt das so nicht.

That’s how it is.

No mandatory building line.

But you wrote it that way. That’s why my information about it.

The parceled plot will definitely be built on. Possibly like this:



Are the trees existing and do they need to be preserved?