Hello everyone,
I would like to get some feedback and, ideally, suggestions for improvement on our building project from the community.
Regarding the site conditions:
We have a plot of approximately 14 x 35 meters (46 x 115 feet). Due to an easement, building right at the front of the property is not feasible, so the building needs to be set back about 10 meters (33 feet) from the street.
The width of our building is limited by the distance to the neighboring building.
The existing structure is only 1.14 meters (3.7 feet) from the property line. After consulting with the building authority, at least 5 meters (16 feet) distance from this building is required to build without fire protection measures.
This results in an effective building width of 7 meters (23 feet).
Now about the house itself:
We want to build a two-story house. Ideally, two full stories, but we could also accept a high knee wall (starting at 2 meters / 6.6 feet).
A gable roof is mandatory according to the development plan (38 - 55° roof pitch; however, nearby houses were also built with a 30° pitch).
We would like to have at least 130 m² (1,400 sq ft) of living space.
Besides the usual rooms, we want the following:
Ground floor with a shower bathroom; a study room of at least 6 m² (65 sq ft) — which could also be moved to the upper floor if necessary; upper floor with two children's bedrooms.
We aim to keep construction costs below €400,000. We plan to contribute through painting and floor installation (except tiles).
Therefore, my goal was to limit the floor plan length to 12 meters (39 feet), but I ended up with 12.5 meters (41 feet).
Every square meter costs money!
I would appreciate your thoughts on this.
If any information is missing, please let me know. I tried to include everything here, but as a beginner, excuse me if I have overlooked something.
I would like to get some feedback and, ideally, suggestions for improvement on our building project from the community.
Regarding the site conditions:
We have a plot of approximately 14 x 35 meters (46 x 115 feet). Due to an easement, building right at the front of the property is not feasible, so the building needs to be set back about 10 meters (33 feet) from the street.
The width of our building is limited by the distance to the neighboring building.
The existing structure is only 1.14 meters (3.7 feet) from the property line. After consulting with the building authority, at least 5 meters (16 feet) distance from this building is required to build without fire protection measures.
This results in an effective building width of 7 meters (23 feet).
Now about the house itself:
We want to build a two-story house. Ideally, two full stories, but we could also accept a high knee wall (starting at 2 meters / 6.6 feet).
A gable roof is mandatory according to the development plan (38 - 55° roof pitch; however, nearby houses were also built with a 30° pitch).
We would like to have at least 130 m² (1,400 sq ft) of living space.
Besides the usual rooms, we want the following:
Ground floor with a shower bathroom; a study room of at least 6 m² (65 sq ft) — which could also be moved to the upper floor if necessary; upper floor with two children's bedrooms.
We aim to keep construction costs below €400,000. We plan to contribute through painting and floor installation (except tiles).
Therefore, my goal was to limit the floor plan length to 12 meters (39 feet), but I ended up with 12.5 meters (41 feet).
Every square meter costs money!
I would appreciate your thoughts on this.
If any information is missing, please let me know. I tried to include everything here, but as a beginner, excuse me if I have overlooked something.
f_meyer schrieb:
I have reviewed this carefully.
My understanding is that both plots would be merged again. Then, in principle, a separate ownership area would be assigned to me for the area of the "new construction plot." This would mean that setback distances would no longer need to be considered, since both buildings would be on the same property.
Furthermore, fire protection requirements including spacing and other regulations of the development plan would still need to be observed.
The homeowners association would then consist of my wife, my mother, and me. How would a possible future sale of one of the buildings work?
Would all rights and obligations transfer only for the respective building to the buyer? So, either just the separate ownership area (new construction) or the property (existing building) minus the "depreciation" of the separate ownership area would be sold?
That would indeed be an option. Thanks for this input.
One question remains regarding setback distances for existing buildings / protected status.
After all, I received the information that I could build this way and only need to maintain a 5-meter (16 feet) distance due to fire protection from an employee at the building authority.
On what basis did they give this statement? What could they be referring to?
I also read in another forum that for existing buildings without entry in the land register, no setback to the neighboring property is required.
These are just statements, though. Therefore, I would prefer a reference to a specific legal paragraph or similar. Why "merged again"? From my point of view, plot 145 does not appear to be a newer parcel. On one property, buildings could even be constructed directly adjacent to each other without setbacks (although this could lead to a higher building classification), and fire protection would be assessed differently.
Your building site would legally be something like a "condominium" with its own land register sub-entry; your mother’s share and yours would be individually transferable. If you are reading externally, you might also want to include Escroda (original blue) or Dimeto (green) in your inquiry.
The five meters (16 feet) mentioned by the building authority employee, I suspect, refer to an opening facing you in your mother’s garage wall or similar, and as mentioned, probably apply to buildings that are actually privileged at the boundary on your property.
However, this is also near the limits of the advice I can provide, both in terms of pro bono consultation and legal permission (legal advice law) — I am a technical building consultant operating privately within the framework of an association.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
f_meyer schrieb:
On what basis did he make that statement? What could he be referring to? We can't know that. I would therefore submit a building inquiry and not rely on verbal statements.
f_meyer schrieb:
I understand it as both plots being combined again. What does the side of the main house look like? Is there a possibility to build an attached garage there? What do you mean by "corridor to the main house"?
Ownership according to condominium law (WEG) or sale: if the house is usable and there are clear agreements or contracts, selling a house under condominium law (land) should not cause disadvantages, similar to the situation with a semi-detached house.
f_meyer schrieb:
Building window, building line and boundary: 3.5 m (11.5 ft) from the street f_meyer schrieb:
However, we have to build set back (plot shown in the screenshot) and are about 10 meters (33 ft) from the street. Then why 10 meters (33 ft)?
So, although the plot is narrow, it is by no means too narrow to build on. Terraced houses or semi-detached houses are sometimes narrower than what you could build here.
I estimate about 7.60 meters (25 feet) house width.
I still don’t understand why the entrance shouldn’t be placed on the side if that would create more living space.
11ant schrieb:
Why "reunited" again? Before the division, parcels 145 + 146 were one large property. This division was made in the course of an extension.
11ant schrieb:
I assume the five meters mentioned by the building official relate to an opening facing you in your mother’s garage wall or something similar, and then, as mentioned, would probably even apply to buildings with special boundary privileges on your property. Yes, of course it’s speculative. But today I spoke again with another employee, because this whole topic is bothering me and I wanted to get a better understanding from them.
The outcome was again that a 7-meter (23 feet) width and 5-meter (16 feet) distance to the neighboring property must be maintained.
Therefore, a viable option is indeed:
ypg schrieb:
I would therefore submit a preliminary building inquiry and not rely on verbal statements. I had my father send me a document.
There is a building encumbrance (easement) in the front area due to the extension. This explains the corridor and the staggered construction.
If the distance to the encumbrance is observed, the building would be extremely narrow. Therefore, the building should start where the encumbrance ends -> this results in almost 10 meters (33 feet) to the street.
ypg schrieb:
I calculate a house width of about 7.60 meters. Could you explain how you arrived at approximately 7.60 meters (25 feet)?
From my perspective, that would also assume that two times 3 meters (10 feet) of setback area on the own property are maintained, but setbacks from the existing building (without encumbrance) do not have to be taken into account.
Regarding the side entrance:
Yes, I gave this idea more thought today. It is indeed an option we are not ruling out. The argument in favor is better use of space, while the counterargument is a longer walk to the entrance.
I will try to implement this in a floor plan in the next few days.
f_meyer schrieb:
the staggered construction method. Where exactly do you see a staggered construction here? There is a straight line on the west side!
f_meyer schrieb:
the corridor What exactly do you mean by corridor?
f_meyer schrieb:
If the setback to the easement is observed, the building would be very narrow The main thing is to comply with the easement. In that case, no additional setback is required.
f_meyer schrieb:
Therefore, the building starts where the easement ends -> this results in nearly 10 meters to the road No, that is not clear. But never mind, if you build further back, you can place a carport or a bike shed at the front.
f_meyer schrieb:
longer walkway to the entrance. You can't be serious… 10 meters (33 feet) 😉
You will drive onto the property with your car anyway. 10 meters (33 feet) is nothing, but still provides enough distance from the road.
f_meyer schrieb:
Building restriction in the front area due to the extension. That also explains the corridor and the staggered construction.
If the distance to the building restriction were observed, the building would be very narrow. Therefore, the building starts where the restriction ends -> this results in nearly 10 meters (33 feet) to the street I don’t know where you get the idea that a house should have the same width from front to back. Besides, I don’t see the setback area as limited to the registered building restriction area. Apparently, at the original construction date of the mother’s house, it was allowed not to maintain a boundary setback from a plot within the same ownership, and the main house was built at a distance of 9.80 meters (32 feet) from the street. When the extension was later added onto the yard, the situation must have changed to the current valid conditions, and the building permit was issued with the condition that the building restriction area be recorded to assume the setback area.
Your assumption that you may begin construction behind the setback area—approximately 10 meters (33 feet) from the street-side boundary and roughly aligned with the mother’s main house—with only a 3-meter (10 feet) boundary setback, I consider mistaken. In my view, your boundary setback extends beyond the marked area, covering the full depth of the mother’s house, which is a substantial 18 meters (59 feet) from the street boundary. Furthermore, a street-side setback of 5 meters (16 feet) seems most likely to be regarded as “correct” in this case.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Similar topics