How to obtain an exemption from the development plan?

I would not automatically dismiss a knee wall of 50 cm in Bavaria - Buchloe is indeed Allgäu, but in Franconia we quite often have this vacuum cleaner knee wall here in the forum even in new building areas. You can place a [Drempel] of 120 behind it. As a rule, I find the series connection of knee wall and [Drempel] nonsense, but in this size ratio it might fit. I would not make a [Drempel] of 140, as in my opinion the top edge of the window would be too high.

Maybe I also have a brutal flaw in my logic.....

So, this is how I think.
If I have a knee wall of 50 cm at the top with a roof pitch of max. 28°, then the reasonably usable space up there becomes significantly smaller. Then I can't fit all the rooms in as desired and have to move, for example, the storage room downstairs. That means 10 sqm more floor space.
This then leads to:
- 10 sqm more foundation slab
- 10 sqm more intermediate ceiling
- about 10 sqm more roof area
- accordingly more exterior wall

So it becomes significantly more expensive.
If I raise the knee wall by 50 cm, then I get all the rooms nicely up there and can save myself the negative points just listed. But I do have a bit more exterior wall because it’s 50 cm higher. But overall it should be cheaper, right?

The costs are actually my main point of concern.
Otherwise maybe the slightly larger floor area, but with the large plot of land those 10 sqm of floor space don’t really make much difference.

Do I really have a flaw in my thinking?

Best regards
Specki

I will quote again from my original post, to be precise from the quote of the LRA’s e-mail:
"the development plan 'XXX' of the city of XXX is certainly already somewhat outdated and nowadays the fixed house types would certainly look different."

And then:

However, the development plan still constitutes the legal basis for granting building permits – a planned construction project must therefore be measured against the specifications made there.

I don’t have to think only about my current needs, right? Am I not allowed to think about the needs in old age, when the children are gone and the pension is not as good as I might like it to be?

Don’t twist the facts: no one, including me, is against your thinking about retirement planning, but attacking a development plan just to gain the option for a granny flat in order to receive the second KFW subsidy is simply not acceptable. That is my opinion.

My tip was and is:

To build nicely: Build the ground floor a bit larger and then on the upper floor under the roof a 1.20 m knee wall. Then it will be a great little house.

because you make a few planning changes and maybe build 5 sqm bigger so that you can include a granny flat...

If it’s only about 5 sqm for you, then I ask you whether you really only want to claim the KFW subsidy. One does not sue, does not ask other neighbors, and does not argue over 5 sqm.

I think anyway that the second KFW subsidy will be gone in the future. If there are still such subsidies at all. The state has nothing left to give away now. We will have to be very careful.

Do I really have a flawed line of thinking?

Imho yes. What you need more of in concrete and stones for a larger ground floor, because otherwise the upper floor would be too small, you stack on top when you raise the knee wall and reduce the footprint for it. That little extra concrete for the base plate and ceiling usually doesn't make much of a difference, unless you're planning a pile foundation in a moor. If you’re short on that little bit of money, you can't build anyway.

And in the interior finishing, it doesn’t matter to me at all, since the usable space does not change.

If the property reaches the target condition, that is great. When it comes to the size of the garden, it doesn’t matter at all whether your house occupies a floor area of 120 or 100m².

Don’t twist the facts: no one, not even me, has anything against your idea of retirement provision, but the option for the granny flat, in order to claim the second KFW grant, and therefore challenging a development plan, is simply not okay. That is my opinion.

I think you misunderstood that.
It’s all independent of the granny flat. It would also be possible, if the ground floor becomes large enough, to build a small granny flat upstairs, also with a low knee wall.
Either way, we would want to raise the knee wall, if possible.
When we know how we can build, we will consider, regardless of whether the knee wall goes up or not, whether it makes sense for us to include a granny flat. For exactly the two reasons mentioned.
So nothing to do with twisting facts…

If it’s only about 5 sqm to you, then I ask you if you really just want to claim the KFW grant. You don’t sue over 5 sqm, don’t ask the other residents, and don’t argue about it.

I would appreciate it if you would finally stop making assumptions.
You don’t know me. I "tick" a bit differently than most people. I always try, when possible, to save money. But without cutting corners on quality that is important to me. However, that often looks different than it does to other people. I work as an engineer, but only a 3/4 position, so 30 hours a week. I am currently still paying off our two-family house with 1600 sqm of land. It all works if you live accordingly. Many cannot understand that, but for me/us it is good that way. So I want to make sure as little money as possible goes into the project, which is why even 5 sqm matter if I could do without it without losing comfort that is important TO ME. So I simply have different priorities than most.
And again, since you seem to read very selectively: I do not want to sue!
Why it is reprehensible to ring the neighbors to ask if they perhaps deviated from the development plan and if they would have a problem if I build 50 cm higher is really not reprehensible in my eyes. I wonder why that is such a drama for you?
We seem to live in different worlds with different ideas. Please try to view me more neutrally and not from your apparently completely different perspective.
That would please me, thanks.

What you need more of in concrete and little stones for a larger ground floor, because otherwise the upper floor would be too small, you just stack on top if you raise the knee wall and reduce the footprint. The little extra concrete for the slab and ceiling usually doesn’t make much difference, unless you plan a pile foundation in the swamp. If you lack that little bit of money, you can’t build anyway.

Thanks, I will think about it some more and talk to the construction companies.
However, it will be a timber house. Probably the slab will not be cheap either, because it is KFW40.
The little money is not missing, still I want to build cost-optimally.

If the plot reaches the intended condition, that would be great. Regarding the garden size, it really doesn’t matter whether your house has a footprint of 120 or 100 sqm.

Yes, it doesn’t really matter. Still, every sqm of garden is important to me.
Currently, the entire plot has 220 sqm of chicken enclosure, 110 sqm vegetable growing area. Storage for firewood, fruit trees. Many berry bushes, shelter for two trailers, large rabbit enclosure and a good amount of green space for the kids to do archery, build bounce castles, and run around.
So, as you can see, the garden is important to us.
But you are right. 20 sqm won’t make the difference.

I think I will just call the guy from the district office again and ask if there really is no possibility and mention the first house on the street again.
If I get a refusal, I will see with the construction companies how we can make the best out of it.