“We would very much like to agree – but the district office would give us a blow.” This sentence by Paul Hörl (CSU) sums up the problem of the market council with a planned construction project in Forstseeon. An application was made there to build a new residential building and to expand an existing butcher’s shop with a farm shop. What is generally rated positively by the municipality – however, for legal reasons, approval is currently not possible.
Specifically, it is about a new building on Forstseeoner Straße with a garage with almost 100 square meters of floor space. The butcher’s shop is to be extended to the east in about the same size, according to the applicant, this should create more space for the farm shop and the cold storage rooms. According to a statement from the Kirchseeon town hall, the plans are generally considered to be “inserted in the urban environment” – but also not eligible for approval.
The reason for this is the outdoor area filling statute applicable in Forstseeon. This specifies where in the village in the northeast of the market town, for example, residential buildings may be built – and the residential building that has now been applied for is not located in one of these areas. According to the District Office, it is also not possible to invoke the privilege of agricultural properties in the project. In principle, residential buildings in connection with farms can also be built outdoors – but not unlimited: “Since a works manager’s house and a service building have already been approved for the farm in question, the district office believes that the project will not be given privileges (…).”
That is why, according to the Ebersberg authority, the general requirements for building outdoors apply, and according to these, the buildings applied for are not eligible for approval. The district office refers on the one hand to the current land use plan, on the other hand to the otherwise existing “extension of a splinter settlement”. But the district office does not consider the proposed project to be entirely impossible: The market community is asked to check whether the necessary building law could be created via the land-use planning, specifically a change in the external area gap filling statute.
Mayor Jan Paeplow (CSU) now suggested exactly this path to the council members: “The district office has opened a little door for us.” On the other hand, the committee had to reject the actual application for a preliminary decision for residential buildings, butchers and farm shops, “unfortunately it is not legally possible”.
The rejection was then decided without dissenting votes, with the reference that the building was currently not approved. At the same time, however, reference is made to the fact that one can “basically imagine the construction of the buildings surveyed”. To do this, however, the applicant would have to provide another one, this time to amend the statutes, and the costs incurred would have to be borne by him.
In addition, the municipal council refers to the possible consequences should the buildings be constructed: This could mean that the village could be classified as an interior area in the future. This can result in changes in building law, for example that areas will in future be classified as outdoor areas that are currently still buildable according to the statutes.