Deviation from the development plan, justification?

Hello dear forum participants,

my wife and I bought a building plot about 2 years ago. Originally, we wanted to build a house with a gable roof, but after visiting various show home exhibitions, we came across a staggered shed roof house that we really like. The development plan specifies a "knee wall height of 1m up to the top edge of the foot purlin." That would have been sufficient for our original plan. The staggered shed roof house now has a knee wall of about 0.6m up to the top edge of the foot purlin on one side (small shed), but on the opposite side, the knee wall height is about 1.35m up to the top edge of the foot purlin (large shed). Could I be successful with the building inquiry if I argued that the average knee wall height would actually be slightly under one meter? Has any forum participant already had this problem and could give me a tip? We would fully comply with the other requirements of the development plan; no maximum ridge height is specified, only the roof pitch between 32° and 40°, which we would also comply with. The shed roof design is expressly permitted in the development plan.

Regards,

Marco

Hi Wastl,
thanks for your first assessment. The development plan even foresees houses with 2 full floors at this location, which could alternatively be built. Our plot is located in a dead-end street, directly neighboring two city villas (2-story with hipped roofs) and normal 1.5-story gable roof houses. Today I happened to meet the (future) neighbor from whom we bought the plot and who also happens to still be on the local advisory council. He says that the knee wall height increase would not be a problem. I will just go to the building authority and hope that it helps. In the new development area, the development plan has already been intentionally violated in several places ... I can even directly identify several houses in the surrounding area where the knee wall would also have to be higher than 1m. So far, no demolition has been ordered anywhere, only fines have been imposed.
Greetings from the Palatinate,
Marco

Hello Marco,

another idea: How is the house oriented towards the street?
If from the street you only see the 60 cm, and the 1.35 m are at the back in the garden, then that might also be a helpful argument. This way, the streetscape remains as the city wants it...

Just a thought...

Best regards
Micha

Hi Micha,

thanks for your idea. When you look at our property from the street or the turning circle, you see the two desks/offsets directly. The house is located relatively far back on the property, behind it is an older house with 2 full floors. About a week ago, I submitted an application for a deviation from the development plan regarding the knee wall situation, along with an exposé of the house. I just talked to an architect about the situation yesterday and also showed him the development plan. He says that the increase should actually not be a problem. As soon as I have the decision, I will post it here.

Greetings from the Pfalz,

Marco