Primary direction parallel to the road or 90-degree angle?

Hello,

the development plan for our building area does not specify the ridge direction. It only specifies the buildable plot area (building boundary). We do not have a normal rectangular plot, but an irregularly shaped one (see picture). The inner dashed line is supposed to represent the setback area. To the south (at the bottom edge) runs the street, and the driveway is also there. The detailed development plan does not specify anything about a ridge direction. And you can also see that in the houses that have already been built. The ridge does not always point in the same direction there. Due to the irregular shape of the building plot, we wanted to position our house "at an angle" in order to make the best possible use of the south/west side. Now suddenly the guy from the district office comes and says no, no, that’s not allowed. A house must always be parallel to the street or at a 90-degree angle to the street. He cannot approve an angle of about 70 degrees. And I cannot find anything about that anywhere. Our architect was not aware of this either, since the development plan contains no information on this, and it was therefore assumed that within the building boundary, I could rotate and position my house however I want. Now I am a bit speechless. Has anyone ever heard of such a "regulation" or did the guy just have a bad day?

If this is actually the case, we will have a really hard time orienting our house or planning the floor plan :(

since the development plan has no information on this and it was therefore assumed,

Yes, if there is absolutely nothing stated, then everything within the building boundary should be allowed, regardless of the angle. Even an arbitrary position should be permitted. In your case, there is even the parallel reference at the NE boundary. Not even that would have to be. However, these boundaries and parallel alignments exist in many minds.

Has anyone ever heard of such a "regulation"

Yes, certainly. There are regulations for parallel alignment to a public street in order to maintain a consistent appearance. Often combined with a building line.

If that should actually apply, we will have a really hard time aligning our house or planning the floor plan :(

Oh, there are quite a few possibilities. Your recognizable floor plan, for example, has some flaws: garden facing the street, entrance very far away, dining/dining table not oriented toward the afternoon sun, TV/sofa in the light, technology in the rear part of the property. I think there are better arrangements. But that was not your question. If you want to place the house like this, it should be possible. Study the development plan again and convince the dusty district administrator.

Regarding the location of the house. Maybe you should show how the surrounding plots and their houses are situated, Google Maps.

Regarding the planned house and the recognizable content, I agree with .

The detailed development plan does not specify any ridge direction.

I also don't see anything - but that could simply be because you are not showing it. Such things can be stated in the development plan (in the drawing section or the textual stipulations), but possibly also in another local design statute. And the currently valid development plan applies - not a draft or an older version or merely a derived sales brochure of the plots.

That's fine. For example, like this.

So, talked to the district administrator again. He sees the "proposed building outlines on the development plan" as a binding ridge direction. When reminded again that it is only a proposal, he replied, "life is not fair."

But he gave me a loophole. If you submit it as an exemption to the municipality for approval, which then approves it (because they themselves say there is no ridge direction, only the district authority interprets it that way), it doesn't even get on the desk of the stuffy old man and the matter should be settled, right?