How much setback from the boundary for a house on a slope? (BW)

I only see the attic lining the substrate, the grass root, and about a thumb width above that. From the street, you can only see the inclination on the gable at all. I would not raise anything higher than necessary, if only because of the height restrictions / effects on the distance areas.

Whereas the roof, with an inclination of 5°, is not counted at all towards the distance areas, right? I would have expected that in this case only up to the wall height is counted. Or does (5)2 apply here then?


Here I planned the house into the slope. 2.5m clear room height and ceiling/roof between 0.35m and 0.45m. If I calculate from the interpolated street height, I would come to about 6.1m with roof and gable. The basement floor would be, if FB = garden level, on average 1.4m. Thus 7.5m * 0.4 = 3m distance area. Could the basement be "buried" even further to reduce the distance areas a bit more?

Only 1.4m + 6.5m is 7.9m * 0.4 is 3.16m Then your house becomes 32 cm narrower again. Provided your planner comes up with the 1.4m. There is some leeway, for example, the foundation of the [CP] already covers a lot of the basement wall. The description of the reference point of the height is not clear. Does the middle of the street or the roadside apply?

It also works with the attic. Roof pitches in the sketch are disregarded

Only 1.4m + 6.5m is 7.9m * 0.4 equals 3.16m Then your house becomes 32 cm narrower again. Assuming your planner arrives at the 1.4m. There is room for maneuver here, for example the foundation of the CP already covers a lot of the basement wall.

The description of the reference point for the height is not clear. Does it apply to the middle of the street or the edge of the street?

That’s true, although I come to 6.1m for the house from street level. But as you say, it’s also questionable what exactly the reference level at the street is.

Silly question… If the building authority approves the plans and one was, for example, not at 6.5m in the plan but at 6.7m and at the setback areas at 2.8m instead of 3m and they would approve that. Would such a building then be lawful? Or would the surveyor eventually point out these discrepancies and then what? Demolition of an entire house is rather difficult.

And what about if one extends the roof on the south side forward? Would such a thing be generally allowed to extend beyond the building envelope?

Whereas the roof, with a slope of 5°, is not counted at all towards the setback areas, right?
I would have expected that in this case only up to the wall height is calculated.

The gable – however far you want to call it an attic or not – counts towards the wall height; the roof rising behind it with this slope does not.

Silly question... If the building authority approves the plans and, for example, the plan shows 6.7m instead of 6.5m and the setback areas show 2.8m instead of 3m and they would approve that. Would such a construction be lawful?

The building authority does not just approve anything. Either you build according to an exemption, then they do not review submitted documents, but there are also no deviations allowed. 20 cm is already beyond the tolerance and costs at least a substantial fine. If the building application is approved, it is approved including contained deviations; only what corresponds to the approved application should be built. If the municipality gives an approval recommendation and the district office follows it without objecting to deviations, this approval applies (but it can be challenged if a neighbor protests promptly).

That's true, although I come to 6.1m for the house from street level. But as you say, it is also questionable what exactly the reference level at the street is.

The unclear reference height should be clarified beforehand. That’s what the building authority is for. It’s about approximately 6 cm. Or it can be interpreted in my favor.

But you left out the greenery.

There are many possibilities. For example, with an open wooden beam ceiling, the clear height can be reduced. Or by using a setback floor, the wall area can be reduced.

Silly question... If the building authority approves the plans and for example the plan shows not 6.5m but 6.7m, and for the distance areas 2.8m instead of 3m, and they approve it. Would such a building then be lawful? Or would the surveyor eventually point out these discrepancies and what then? Demolishing an entire house is rather difficult

Aside from the fact that there are no silly questions. Compliance with the development plan is the easiest thing for the building authority to check when approving. Then come the other regulations. It is better to plan and build according to all the rules of the development plan. Deviations from the development plan cost time and money. However, they are occasionally approved if well justified.

And how does it look if you extend the roof on the south side? Would something like that be allowed to extend beyond the building envelope in principle?

In my opinion, no. But a qualified building inquiry with justification helps here. If it’s a small municipality, you can also go to the building authority in person and ask whether it makes sense to submit a building inquiry for that.