Interpretation of development plan - terrain height

  • Erstellt am 2020-06-04 08:02:59

SimVo91

2020-06-04 08:02:59
  • #1
Hello everyone,

I recently received the development plan for my parents' house and have a section that I do not clearly understand, so I hope someone in this forum can help me.

The section reads:
The height of the buildings may range from the specified -natural- average measured ground surface to the highest eave........

How exactly should this be understood? I have read that the natural ground surface refers to an undeveloped and unchanged (thus natural) surface (in the picture theoretically the red line). However, this is only partially comprehensible, as the ground was excavated during construction (green line).

There are also some entries that define the middle of the property as the reference point for measurement, while others define the middle of the house as the reference point.
Also, nothing is defined anywhere (see plan)


I hope the information I have provided is sufficient to give me some assistance. I already apologize for my poor drawing skills and hope the picture still illustrates my problem.

Thanks in advance for your help and attention.

Regards
Simon

 

Escroda

2020-06-04 09:24:37
  • #2

Since the development plan contains contour lines, this is not a problem. The former elevations can be interpolated at any desired point.

What do you mean by "entries"? Where are they located?

One can do little with postage-stamp-sized plan excerpts without accompanying text. Perhaps the justification for the development plan might also help.

With older development plans, reference point definitions were often handled very imprecisely, which occasionally led to the invalidity of the determination, possibly even of the entire development plan.


No. Not understanding the elevation determination is not a problem, especially since the house already exists. Do you want to make changes? Are there disagreements with the municipality or the approval authority?
 

SimVo91

2020-06-04 09:46:28
  • #3

I meant various posts or explanations on other forums and websites that I have read.. and which give contradictory statements...


I have attached larger attachments here


I have attached the relevant section, but I am not exactly sure if this is the requested "justification"... (Text.png)


The plan is from 1970... with some additions from 1993, which only involve dormers and garages. Since I am not familiar with the standard of reference point definitions, unfortunately I do not know whether what is stated in Text.png is sufficient.


I want to extend the house. Ideally, I would try to get an extension to 2 full floors. Currently, only 1 full floor is allowed, but some neighboring houses, at least in my opinion, already have 2 full floors due to excavation of the hill.

Regards
Simon


 

SimVo91

2020-06-04 10:24:36
  • #4
Could not edit the post anymore for some reason.... attached is the plan with the described contour lines
 

Escroda

2020-06-04 13:17:39
  • #5

They confuse more than they help, because the definitions of elevation reference points vary greatly.

Since there is no universally binding definition for the elevation reference, contradictions can only occur if the statements refer to exactly the same area. Very unlikely on the WWW.

No, these are the textual stipulations. Zoning plans must also have a justification, which is not part of the statute and therefore not published by many municipalities. However, inspection must be granted upon request.

Neither do I. IMHO it is not sufficient, because exactly your questions cannot be clearly answered based on the formulations. Also, no clarity can be established through interpretation, as you have already recognized based on the different findings on the WWW. However, in your case it is not a stipulation according to the Federal Building Act (today Building Code) that is supposed to determine the scale of structural use, but a design stipulation according to the State Building Code. I am not familiar with the historical state law in BW, so I cannot assess the relevance of this circumstance.

This is likely to be a measure requiring approval that requires a qualified professional for building submissions. You should choose this person carefully so that they dedicate the necessary commitment to the historical planning and building regulations and make it easy for the approval authority to make the correct decision in your favor as part of a building inquiry.

Nothing is more harmful than arguing with apparent facts that quickly prove to be incorrect. If you want to justify your deviation with examples from the neighborhood, you must be absolutely sure and the same conditions as yours must apply. Here I strongly recommend using the experience of local experts.
 

Similar topics
17.02.2016According to the development plan, 2 full floors but only 3.8m height.17
07.11.2016Cost estimation KfW 40+, calculation of full floors17
15.03.2018Cost for house, external dimensions approximately 7x8 m, 2 full floors49
10.06.2018Build a house with a knee wall 75cm high or two full stories? Your opinion?17
25.06.2018New construction 220 sqm city villa with hipped roof, 2 full floors53
18.07.2018Single-family house with two full floors, shed roof, no basement31
18.10.2018160 sqm single-family house without basement - 2 full floors with gable roof17
05.11.2018Single-family house design 250 m², 2 full floors with hipped roof70
18.04.2019Development plan of 1998 - Setting the eaves height to a maximum of 3.00m12
31.03.20202 full floors or 1.5 floors13
08.03.2020House design city villa, 2 full floors, double garage30
05.10.2020Questions about the development plan (full floors, knee wall)11
26.06.2020Bauhaus: 2 full floors + staggered floor (approx. 200 sqm) - optimization31
25.07.2020Single-family house 180 sqm, basement, 2 full floors + gable roof16
17.11.2020Floor plan - Single-family house planning 2 full floors - city villa113
10.11.2023Floor plan design, 2 full floors, approximately 130-140 sqm without basement192
13.08.2021Floor plan optimization for new construction, single-family house with 2 full floors without basement on a slope33
10.11.2021Floor plan optimization single-family house 2 full floors approx. 180 sqm50
18.02.2022Floor plan, two full floors without basement, 170-180 sqm31
29.09.2022Floor plan window planning for 2 full floors flat roof 135 sqm20

Oben