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

Such clarification would have been a significant advantage in an original cadastral map screenshot.

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

11ant schrieb:

A futile effort, because this way no connection can be recognized beyond the two plot parts themselves; meaning there is no chance to come up with a better proposal.

There is no influenceable connection beyond the two plots and the street. Around them are only other plots with detached houses, bungalows, or urban villa developments.

However, I have gladly cropped the relevant cadastral map from the ALKIS.

This concerns plot 1874.
By the way, plot 1875 has another building not listed here, which definitely does not comply with the 5m (16 ft) setback from the street.

I would argue there are quite a few cases where either permission was not properly granted or the floor area ratio is above 0.2.

11ant schrieb:

I join the group recommending the path as a third parcel of land, jointly owned by both neighbors. @Escroda: could a setback area be applied there without excluding a (non-paved) driveway surface?

According to the builder, this is not possible in Berlin. The Berlin building code requires a real division of plots here, each of which must independently allow residential development. Access to the street for the rear plot must then be granted via a rights-of-way agreement. I’m not certain if this is actually accurate.

Therefore, one idea would be to allocate the strip half to one plot and half to the other in a real division. The problem is that in that case, I may have to maintain a 6m (20 ft) setback from the north side as well.

11ant schrieb:

@Escroda:

Well, where should I start?
First of all, Berlin’s planning regulations are extremely complex, as in some areas even plans from 1862 still have legal effect.

When the original poster (OP) says that this or that must be observed, the question is who was actually consulted. All statements seem to be based on hearsay from a salesperson.
The next question is what influence remains at all on the planning and land subdivision.
The following assumptions do not describe the worst case but provide a basis for discussion, which, according to my interpretation of the OP’s description, is likely:
Let’s simply put aside any possible Berlin-specific peculiarities and assume the regular Section 34 of the Federal Building Code (Baugesetzbuch) applies, with a de facto building limit of 5m (16 feet) from the street boundary line, the same distance that must be granted to the new building from 1875. We also assume that no parking spaces are permitted within this 5m (16 feet) strip. This would necessarily exclude all ancillary structures in this zone (except for an unavoidable access driveway, of course).
In areas governed by Section 34, the building project must fit the type and extent of neighboring development. The measure of development intensity can be a roughly calculated floor area ratio (FAR) of the surrounding buildings. The strict rules of the Land Use Ordinance (Baunutzungsverordnung) do not apply here. We can forget everything we know about FAR I and FAR II. Hence, there is a rough allowance to exceed the calculated FAR of 0.2 by about 15%. With some skillful arguments, a planner might even be able to negotiate more. This gives the FAR some meaning, even if the area is entirely sealed surface. Since shared access ways are often a continuous source of neighborly conflict, I advise against them, though I don’t believe the seller will give this up.

Tolentino schrieb:

I would say there are a lot of things that either were not properly approved or have a FAR greater than 0.2.

You would need to investigate carefully where the 0.2 figure comes from, who determined it and on what basis. However, I think a house of your size requirement should be approvable. Whether such detailed questions already need to be asked depends on the sales promise.

Tolentino schrieb:

I’m not sure if that’s really true.

I don’t believe it either, but I’m not familiar with Berlin.

Tolentino schrieb:

The problem is that then I might have to keep a total distance of 6m (20 feet) from the north side.

No, there could be an easement for setback lines on that strip.
I consider your plan in post #24 the most sensible solution, although with the secondary building on the opposite side of the house. I would personally prefer a separate driveway and allocate the entire path to the rear property, but I see difficulties with the floor area ratio and the seller.

Tolentino schrieb:

Access to the street must then be granted for the rear property through right of way over the ground floor level (GFL).

At a minimum, it would also be possible as a flag lot—with all the usual advantages and disadvantages, of course.

Tolentino schrieb:

The Berlin Building Code requires a physical division of plots here, each of which must independently allow residential development.

Parcels 1973...1976 /3, 2023/3, and 891 appear to be purely access parcels (for the street). A private road would therefore also be possible; your required setback area should at least be allowed to extend to the center of this road.

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

In my opinion, the problem is even more serious for the neighbor. My software shows 430 m² (4628 ft²) for their plot. 430 x 0.23 = 98.9 m² (1064 ft²). If we subtract the minimum (15 m² (161 ft²) for a parking space + 12 m² (129 ft²) for a terrace), that leaves 71.9 m² (774 ft²) for a one-and-a-half-story house. So, it would be a tiny house about 10 x 7 meters (33 x 23 feet) — not particularly appealing, and somehow they still need access to the front door, so the actual usable area is likely even less.

@Escroda Setting aside the skills of a project planner to negotiate more floor space based on neighboring developments, is there any possibility of excluding the access road from the floor space index (FSI) / floor area ratio (FAR)?

kaho674 schrieb:

Would it be possible to exclude the access road from the floor area ratio?

Since there is no development plan, auxiliary structures and sealed surfaces do not count toward the floor area ratio. Under §34, the floor area ratio is roughly determined based on neighboring buildings, usually using aerial images or cadastral maps, provided a local comparison has been made (see new construction on neighboring plots).
Given the stated political intention to promote densification, a floor area ratio of 0.2 is unreasonable anyway. Based on the photos, it is likely around 0.3 on average here.

All relevant facts should be verified with the permitting authority (building permit/planning permission).