Development plans should leave room for creativity

Altluheim.A building owner plans to build a single-family home and garage on Anne-Frank-Straw. A project that does not coincide in all points with the local development plan “Hockenheim Fluor I, 2D Amendment” is why the municipal council must agree on some exceptions at its January meeting. For example, the builder decided on a hip roof. Such roofs are exceptionally permitted and can also be found in the neighborhood, so that the council approved the exception as well as crossing the access width of the property. A second driveway is not actually planned in the area, but since no public parking space is lost, a waiver is possible.

A plan to partially expand a barn in the area behind the property to create new living space was also approved. This is also because a new residential building was originally planned at this point that did not follow the boundary of the rear building. This initial construction request was rejected by the council – as it was on a much larger scale – everyone can now live with the slimmed-down version.

Dismissed after a negative vote

A builder is also allowed to work at Schwabenstrasse – but different than expected. Because he wanted to retrospectively build a gazebo, he would now have to end it, as the council refused to approve it.

Ines Schweickert (CDU) found the term “Gazebo” irritable, after all, it was a 164-square-meter building. At the top, the administration had already complained that the minimum distance to the rear property boundary had not been maintained and that the property as a whole had been expressly constructed. The distance required for the rear property line is also recorded as a construction load, so that Sandra Fluhrer (Greens) saw no way for the council to reject it. Fredbert Blaschke (FWV) saw this and recommended Richard Schmidt (SPD), sort of dismantling. As Ines Schweickert said, the project would abandon parking space and vehicles would now have to be parked in public places. She wanted to revise the entire area in the municipal council to clarify what should happen and what should not.

However, in the summer of last year, the council dealt with a separate area and decided on “hapte-, kurpflj-, Waldhorn and Ziegelstrasse” development plans for the internal development of the district. For this, an exception must be decided with one of the first building applications, which neither Simone Köhler (FWV) – “protecting the start” – nor the Greens’ parliamentary group can understand.

The requested increase in a residential building on Hauptstrasse was in itself unproven, except for the size of the roof chosen by the customer, which the development plan does not provide: a mansard roof. However, saddle roofing is permitted. The difference in size of the two roofs is that the roof surface of the mansard roof is folded to the lower area to create additional living space.

Mansard roof approved

Sandra Fluhrer did not consider the size of the chosen roof to be necessary, with Freedbert Blaschke considering it tolerable for the majority of the FWV parliamentary group. Richard Schmidt saw it in a similar way to the Social Democrats, especially since new living spaces were being built and the building owner’s freedom of design should not be tied in too tight a space. The majority can accept the Mansard ceiling and approve it against the votes of the Greens and Simone Köhler. Wake up

© Schweitzinger Zitung, Thursday, February 4, 2021