Building plan with different eave heights

But it doesn't matter, since the ridge direction is predetermined. It’s about comparing the heights to the right of the ridge with those to the left of the ridge. From that, it determines valley-side and mountain-side. Clearly, on an almost flat plot, the result could be inconclusive. But that would then be a reason for exemptions due to atypical plot conditions.

Well. They themselves do not understand what the predecessors intended back then. Maybe the justification for the development plan sheds some light. The statute itself certainly does not. After that, it’s about the maximum value, i.e. the height difference least favorable to the builder.

That’s how it looks according to the description. For certainty— as so often— only the surveyor can provide it.

Hello Escroda,
Thank you for your effort and detailed answer
I have drawn a picture with approximate eave heights etc. Could you please take a look at it? If I understood you correctly with the left and right ridge height, it should work out?!...
However, I do not understand how I am supposed to maintain a ridge height of 3.5 towards the north... then the right front corner would have to stick out, because 5.7 are allowed there? Did I understand that correctly?

Did I understand that correctly?

No.


I have to go now. I'll come back later.

No. [ATTACH alt="Skizze.png"]46668[/ATTACH] Have to go now. Will come back later.

Thanks for the sketch. And how high is the left eaves height on the upper elevation allowed now? 3.5 or 5.7? Oh man... this is really all confusing for me right now.

At the front (street side), the eaves height may be 5.70 meters everywhere from right to left. At the back, the eaves height may be 3.50 meters everywhere from right to left.

Since this is a design specification, I could imagine that an exemption from the building plan (BP) is easier on the rear side (away from the street) than on the front side, especially if the terrain at your place is quite flat.

But surely knows that better than I do.

At the front (street side), the eaves height may be 5.70 meters everywhere from right to left.

Yes.

At the back, the eaves height may be 3.50 meters everywhere from right to left.

Yes.

Since this is a design specification

No. §9, paragraph 1, no. 1 in conjunction with paragraph 3, Building Code.

that an exemption from the BP on the rear side (away from the street) is easier than on the front side

I don’t know.


Theoretically, the eaves height in the southwest could be 70 cm higher than in the southeast, i.e. 341.70, but who builds slanting eaves anyway?

Yes.

Yes.

No. §9, paragraph 1, no. 1 in connection with paragraph 3, Building Code.

Don't know.


Theoretically, the eaves height in the southwest may be 70 cm higher than in the southeast, so 341.70, but who makes slanted eaves?

I am really starting to understand it. I thank you all very much. Just two last questions with pictures for clarification.

1. If I am theoretically allowed to build 5.7 meters on the street side, then I would use this to get as much knee wall as possible, while keeping 3.5 at the back, right? That would result in an asymmetrical house because of the roof. And it would then look as follows (see 2 pictures):

The picture that almost looks like two stories would be the street side and the view with one story would be from the north, where my mountain side is?

2. If I wanted a symmetrical roof, I would also have to reckon with a lower eaves height in the front and a low knee wall both front and back, then I would roughly end up at the eaves heights you drew, Escroda?