Development plan unclear at facade incision

Hello everyone,
we bought a plot of land with an existing basement in the middle of the year. We want to build new on it. However, the existing basement floor plan limits us somewhat in the facade design due to an existing terrace.
After several conversations with general contractors, prefab house suppliers, carpenters & a well-known architect, we have heard many different explanations regarding our "desired exterior facade". And so far, the local building authority has only given us superficial / general statements.
The issue is that the facade may only be set back up to 1/3 – but does this only refer to the eaves height? Or not?
What do you think? Would the facade comply with the development plan?

Here is the floor plan of the existing basement:


Here is a sketch of our desired facade:


Here is the relevant excerpt from the development plan:

You have requirements to meet here, starting with the eaves heights of 2.5 to 3.5 meters above the street on the street side and a maximum of 6.5 meters above the ground level on the garden side. My impression, among other things from the ground floor plan in , is that the top edge of the basement ceiling is already roughly at street level, so I do not see you realizing the moderate knee wall on this side. On the garden side, your recessed eaves side steps back over more than one third of the house length, so here the knee wall maximum would apply as a limit – I do not see the knee wall height as in your drawing here. Applying the requirements to this "inner" eaves side and so to speak dragging the roof into the "ground floor" I would consider feasible. It would also be possible to try out how the option of a staggered shed roof and/or asymmetric roof pitches could be used. However, the aerial image (see attachment) also allows the conclusion that the burned-down building rather tricked the system by having the terrace roofed up to the "central post" – without an exemption I see this as having to apply to the exterior wall as well, at least as suggested and with the consequence of extending the attic floor accordingly.

Thank you in advance!
We calculate the knee wall at zero to a maximum of 40cm, depending on the ground floor ceiling height and how thick the ground floor slab is. This is to ensure that we can maintain the facade height of 3.5m towards the street and 6.5m towards the garden.
The knee wall requirement is attached in text form above - at the very bottom under 2.4.

Without an exemption, I also see this having to apply to the exterior wall, at least implied and with the consequence of extending the attic floor accordingly.

Do you mean like this? (Red wall)


I didn't find asymmetric roof pitch so appealing due to the small difference in roof angles, but I was also thinking of something like this..?:

Do you mean like this? (Red wall)

No, the wall would also have to be extended further, see the blue frame in the attachment.

I didn’t find the asymmetrical roof pitch so appealing due to the small difference in roof angle, but was also thinking about something like this..?

More complicated to build, but probably feasible. What do you mean by roof angle difference? – I simply meant a gable roof without a ridge as a central peak.

What do you mean by roof angle difference?

Oh, I was thinking of something like this: but we don't really like it.

No, the wall would also need to be extended further, see the blue frame in the attachment.

Okay, hmm... I have placed the views of the old and the new facade side by side here. In the old house, that part was also open. However, in the west view, you can also see how the new roof ridge would be a bit higher.

Oh, I thought of something like this:

but we don’t really like it.

Me neither, that’s why I wasn’t thinking of something like that.