Transfer / conveyance of a property to siblings

No. You would only do that if the setback areas or the floor area ratio/building coverage ratio for the front property were not sufficient.

Or, depending on the orientation of the properties, the driveway of the rear property can be used as access to the entrance or parking spaces of the front one. Then you could also make 3 properties out of it and split the path 50:50. The shared path is "yellow."

[ATTACH alt="Bild1.jpg" type="full"]50921[/ATTACH]

If it is legally clarified from a building law perspective, the rear property might even be the nicer one. Further away from the street, with only gardens around (since apparently no construction has taken place in the 2nd row so far).

So many heartfelt thanks for your answers and effort that you put in! Really great!

I will follow all tips and advice.

We have already submitted a building inquiry and it was discussed in a municipal council meeting. There were no objections.
A redivision of the plots and building in the second row is therefore acceptable.

Most of you therefore find it better to separate the access road directly and assign it to the rear plot, so that everything is clarified for the future (winter service, maintenance, cost sharing of the property owners for the reconstruction of the road/sewers, etc.)

We will probably do it in such a way that we do not divide the plots 1:1 according to the area, but share the area for the access road. The rear owner gains nothing from the road but must use it almost compulsorily to reach his house.

If I have not answered anyone’s question, please just get in touch.

Best regards
Birdie

spoken

I would consider a legally binding administrative act in the form of a positive decision to be safer.

The owner at the back doesn't benefit from the street

Yes, parking spaces for visitors.

Thank you very much for your suggestion!

I had also initially considered building on the rear plot. However, the street itself is already very quiet. So the front plot is also very quiet in terms of noise.
Furthermore, there would also be additional costs for house connections / sewers etc.
(And who knows, when the front might be built on in the future. Then you have your house at the back and everything in front by the street is empty)
Moreover, on the rear plot, you have a total of five neighbors, with whom you might occasionally not get along. On the front plot, there are two neighbors.

All of these are ultimately the reasons for me why I do not want to build in the second row first.
Best regards

Good morning,

I would like to update you on the current situation.
By now, I have contacted the [Vermessungsamt]. They informed me that the two plots must first be unified/merged/fused by the notary before a new survey/redivision can take place.

So I contacted the notary and discussed this. Now, the plots will be merged at a joint appointment.

Afterwards, I will apply for a new survey at the [Vermessungsamt], and once that has been done, another appointment will be scheduled with the notary to transfer one of the two plots into my name.

Maybe this information about the process of such a matter will help some of you.

The access roads will be allocated 100% to the plot lying in the second row, so that everything is regulated later and no disputes can arise – hopefully.

Best regards

Birdie

In the meantime, I have contacted the surveying office. They informed me that the two plots must first be united/merged/fused by the notary office before a new survey/redivision can take place.

That would be the usual procedure when it comes to a land reallocation (parcels from seven different owners are changed in their formats and reissued to eight different owners). However, the case here is different – one owner wants to turn his two adjacent adjoining parcels into two parcels adjacent one behind the other and then transfer them to two legal successors. To me, the procedure seems more sensible in the other order here, what does say?