Development plan of 1998 - Setting the eaves height to a maximum of 3.00m

Hello,

we are considering buying a plot of land. The following paragraph is stated in the associated development plan from 1998:

The eaves height is set to a maximum of 3.00m above the reference point. The ridge height of garages, carports, and ancillary structures is set to a maximum of 4.50m above the reference point. The reference point is the height of the street surface edge in front of the middle of the building side facing the street. In the case of rising or falling terrain, the eaves height can be increased or decreased by the amount of the natural terrain slope. The roof pitch of the main buildings is set to 35°-45°.

Based on your experience, is there a possibility to increase the eaves height in coordination with the building authority? Roofs were much thinner in 1998 than today, and we would like to construct the ground floor with a clear room height of 2.8-3.0m.

The terrain is fairly level, so the street and the plot are approximately at the same height.

If I take the sectional drawing of our current house, the base slab is about 15cm above the terrain, then comes 16cm screed and 2-3cm floor covering. Then a room height of 2.59m and a 22cm thick concrete ceiling. On top of that the roof construction, which measures about 80cm vertically from the outside wall upwards. That brings me to an eaves height of 3.73m. So far from the prescribed 3.0m.

And of course, we do not want to build our house partially underground.

I am grateful for any tips :)

Since there is no definition of eaves height in either building planning law or building regulations law, the development plan must provide a definition. I would be interested in the exact wording here. Is it actually the often used intersection of the exterior wall with the roof covering? If the definition is missing in the development plan, at least this provision, if not the entire development plan, is contestable. With a 20-year-old development plan, there probably are not many undeveloped plots left. How does it look in the neighborhood? Have all complied with the provision(s)?

All plots are built upon and all have more or less adhered to the eaves height. 1.5 storeys and gable roofs are prescribed. However, compared to those commonly used today, the roofs are very thin and the terrain slopes downward, so there was probably some discretion regarding the reference point. The eaves height is not further defined. How does a challenge to the development plan generally proceed? I would like to avoid lengthy discussions and proceed as pragmatically as possible.

The responsible authority is the district building office Eutin. The office is known for being very precise. Only a chance if there is a positive statement from the Neustadt city building office. However, that is not to be expected. Because why would one provoke dispute with such an exception in an existing building area? Why shouldn't 3 meters be allowed for a 1.5-story building? Why were roofs different in 1998 than in 2019? Our roof from 2017 is no different from one from 1998. There is nothing thicker. There are no technical factual arguments that make three meters impossible. The house that we built in 2017 in the district OH, where you also live, has less than three meters eaves height. Karsten

You can easily achieve 3m ceiling height and more by building a bungalow and leaving it open up to the roof. One just wonders, what’s the point of the Terz? Do you want to start a choir and need the acoustics?

The roofs were much less thick in 1998 than today

The thickness plays a minor role in the eaves height, after all it is about the interface. The roof is apparently not limited upwards by a ridge height.

and we would like to have the ground floor built with a clear room height of 2.8-3.0m.

Completely exaggerated. If you don't want to live with 2.50, you take 2.75 or so.
With the mentioned dimensions, every room that has a wall length under 2.80 gets the feeling of a cell – they are also rather narrow, but tall...