Planning with an older development plan

I was asked in which points I would like to deviate from the development plan.

And then you misread my remark, and I clarified it. If I was unsuccessful, I’ll gladly try again: You intend to 1. raise the knee wall, 2. reduce the roof pitch, and 3. increase the roof overhang.
To this I said, I. that measure #2 might even overcompensate the success of measure #1, so the combination of measure #1 and #2 must appear nonsensical, and II. the triad of measures #1, #2, and #3 is even a hat trick against the very triad of the respective restrictions which, in turn, in this combination are supposed to “secure” what the municipality perceives as “local color.”

Therefore, I don’t really understand the condescending tone…

There isn’t one either. The development plan is not “condescending” but “assertive” if it wants to protect the building culture of the townscape from Swabian houses creeping into Franconia, Moselle-Franconian into Rhenish Hesse, or the like. And the fact is, this is no bazaar, and accordingly there is nothing to haggle over. If a “deal” along the lines of a “balanced scorecard” were intended, a development planner would for example only limit the building height in total, and not individual parameters.

What are you talking about? The knee wall is set at 50 cm. If I want to use the attic, I can either regularly bang my head on the slope or simply add the knee wall at 130 cm. What’s ridiculous about that?

But you can also keep distance from the wall on the eaves side without putting another knee wall in the second row in front of the original knee wall. The knee wall does not actually increase the knee wall height but only visually – that’s the foolishness about it. At least when it’s about raising the low part of the room (and not hiding it), as here.

My neighbor is currently building like that, although everything between 2 stories is permitted here. Probably he simply likes it. Sometimes you are so far from reality, I don’t understand you.

Then your neighbor must have a different intention than the one mentioned above. And he must be willing to sacrifice some floor area for a “felt higher” room. If he prefers the double doubling “knee wall and knee wall” although a full story would be permitted there, he is also a rare specimen. Must he perhaps be content with dormers instead of gable dormers?

Our wish is exactly to push these deviations to the maximum.

That is exactly what the development planners respond to with ever tighter framework conditions – and the building authorities with increasingly brusque “no!”, … because:

As a neighbor, I would probably complain about your house building if I have complied with guidelines and my neighbor does not, or if I have some disadvantage. And I do if there is a 5-meter-high wall next to my house.

… if they were to generously exempt, they would have to fear lawsuits from those who have accommodated themselves with the specified framework in the past. “I want everything, and right now” Gitte can sing on the radio, but not every neighbor in the building area. One must still get a little daylight on one’s property, even if the new neighbor considers it a kind of self-defense against small lots to inflate his building volume as a trial of strength.

I would simply give the tip to look for another plot of land where a two-story building is allowed. As a neighbor, I would probably complain against your house construction if I had adhered to regulations and my neighbor did not, or if I had any disadvantage. And I do have that if there is a 5-meter high wall next to my house.

The plot of land was already in our family ownership and the almost 40-year-old development plan was also known. All neighbors have signed and no one minds. In fact, we’re not even taller than the neighbors :D The neighboring house is 13 meters wide and has the specified 38-degree roof pitch with a 50 cm knee wall. Roughly calculated, that makes a roof floor height of just over 5.5 m. We only have 8.8 m width and 25-degree roof pitch, but a 2.75 m knee wall. According to the Pythagorean theorem, that makes 4.75 m ;) Thanks to the development plan, almost all houses here have huge footprints and thus a decent roof height.

You intend to 1. raise the knee wall and 2. reduce the roof pitch, as well as 3. increase the roof overhang.
To that I said, I. that measure #2 may even overcompensate for the success of measure #1, so the combination of measure #1 and #2 must appear absurd

Sorry, but don’t you want to understand it? If I have a higher knee wall, I can lower the roof pitch to still achieve my desired ceiling height throughout the entire space. At the same time, a lower roof pitch leads to an optimal orientation of the roof for photovoltaic systems. So where exactly is that supposed to be absurd… i don‘t get it.

You can also keep distance from the eaves-side wall without adding a knee wall in front of the knee stock for the second row. The knee wall doesn’t actually increase the knee stock, only visually – that’s the muddlehead approach to it.

You might be right in the land of dwarfs, but in real life as an adult you regularly bump your head against the wall. With the knee wall you automatically keep more distance and the usable floor space increases. One can certainly discuss whether a 50 cm knee stock belongs in the development plan, but the usability of the attic floor doesn’t improve with more crawling space under the slope.

Then your neighbor must have a different intention than the one mentioned above. And he must be willing to sacrifice some floor space for a “perceptibly higher” room. If he prefers the double approach “knee stock and knee wall” even though a full story would be allowed there, he is quite a rare specimen. Might he have to content himself with dormers instead of gable roofs?

Or you’re just not up to date. I assume the main reason is money. He has no roof extensions or conversions. After all, he does have the knee wall. :p

Neighboring house has a width of 13 meters and the specified 38 degree roof pitch with 50cm knee wall. Roughly calculated, this results in an attic height of over 5.5m. We only have 8.8m width and 25 degree roof pitch, but 2.75 knee wall. That makes 4.75m according to Pythagoras ;)

The total height is just one criterion among many. The 2.75 seems ridiculously high to me, considering the neighboring buildings. That would really be a break in style. I can't imagine the authorities would approve that.

Thanks to the development plan, almost all houses here have huge footprints and thus also a decent roof height.

Yes exactly. Everyone builds like that to comply with the development plan. Think about it....

One must distinguish here between , who is not the thread starter and already has an approved construction project, and , the thread starter who is still in the planning phase. Therefore, should describe her adjustments in a separate thread within the scope of her planned build log and possibly link from here to there, but not repeat all her conditions here. That only causes confusion.