Development plan: Request for explanation regarding land filling

Hello,

My building plot has a slight slope. The street is the highest point and it then slopes gently downwards; at the end of the plot, the height difference is about 2.50 meters.

In the development plan it states that:

For structural use, based on the defined terrain: uphill side: top of rough floor level less than or equal to 0.50 meters measured above top of defined terrain (at the most unfavorable terrain point) downhill side: wall height less than or equal to 4.50 meters measured above top of defined terrain (at the most unfavorable terrain point)

Can someone tell me exactly what this means (what is the most unfavorable terrain point?) How much may I raise the plot? I would like to fill up the entire plot to street level and higher. Am I allowed to do this?

Thanks and regards

Look at it carefully again, I would claim that it is defined somewhere. Either the heights are listed on the properties, or the term "ungünstigster Geländepunkt" is defined in the text.

Hello,

thank you very much for the response. Unfortunately, I cannot find any information about it anywhere

Regards

mountain side: OK raw floor height less than or equal to 0.50 meters measured above OK established terrain (at the most unfavorable terrain point)
valley side: wall height less than or equal to 4.50 meters measured above OK established terrain (at the most unfavorable terrain point)

Apparently, there are several surveyed height points, and measurement should be made starting from the most unfavorable of these points. This is at least simpler than (as is usual) measuring in the middle of the respective side of the house, because in the latter case the "uncertainty relation" would come into play, where each specific building shifts its own conditions. For the layman, this might sound less understandable; for the planning professional, I rather see it as "simplifying the calculation."

From which perspective a point is to be considered more or less favorable for or against someone or something still needs to be clarified somewhere – otherwise, I would see the required definiteness as violated.