Road edge in the middle of the property

Go to the new mayor and explain the situation to him ... it helped us ... it can't hurt ...

You don't know the city well. There are no appointments for citizens. Internal administrative instruction

There is no citizens' consultation hour?

Is there no citizen consultation hour?

Unfortunately not. I have tried everything, but they are unfortunately being stubborn.

Now the building supervisory authority is being consulted and then we'll see. I am still optimistic that an amicable solution can be found without going to court.

Fortunately, not really.

I don’t know whether that is now luck or bad luck. This constellation allows those involved to always point fingers at the others.

But as is often the case politically, the district office in Bavaria unfortunately usually sides with the municipality to avoid straining relations and does not replace the municipal consent.

You have tried to clarify. Your efforts were not rewarded. Then just turn the tables.

If the reference point in the extended driveway were assumed, there would only be a height difference of about 1m which one could reduce to the required value within the development plan with the maximum excavation, if one wants to avoid the legal route.

If no one tells you the reference point and there is a solution without an exemption, then plan in accordance with the development plan and make a clearance according to Art. 58 BayBO. LRA is out of the picture, it goes faster and is cheaper.
And then the staking is done by a dilettante like the city planners seem to be, and suddenly he has built in a height error that unfortunately no one notices.
I am always a fan of official channels. But if these are unjustifiably blocked because those responsible have realized they screwed up and are now hiding behind their institutional edifice, you just have to evade.

I once read the reasoning for the development plan. It’s a joke. Short and contradictory, apparently mostly copied from the equally flawed Part 1 of the development plan (Ctrl C - Ctrl V), no references to the height determinations. The legal basis is not specified exactly at this point in the ordinance text. A lawyer would IMHO tear the thing apart.
If your architect put a little effort into the reasoning for the exemption application, I don’t know with what arguments the municipality and LRA want to reject the application.
But what is the current status? Are the building application and exemption application with the LRA? Do they have the negative opinion from the municipality? Have you been advised to withdraw the application because otherwise it would be rejected with costs?

For us, it was simply the case that the municipality did not want to approve any deviations for a newly designated building area, so that 10 other people wouldn't come along as well ..... we managed to get everything through with the argument that nowadays no one really wants to prevent building accessible, that is, on ground level.

If no one tells you the reference point and there is a solution without an exemption, then plan according to the development plan and make a permit-free clearance according to Art. 58 BayBO. LRA is out, it’s faster and cheaper.
And the staking out will then coincidentally also be done by such a dilettante as the city planners seem to be, and suddenly he has built in an elevation error that unfortunately no one notices.

That would have been my plan too, but the architect doesn’t want to stick his neck out so far either, in case someone ends up reviewing it after all.

But of course, it’s still annoying if you have to dig yourself in because of that.

I read through the justification for the development plan once. It’s a joke. Brief and contradictory, apparently mostly copied from the equally deficient Part 1 of the development plan (Ctrl C - Ctrl V), no references to the height specifications. The legal basis is not specified exactly at this point in the text of the statute. A lawyer would IMHO tear the thing to shreds.
If your architect put even a little effort into the justification for the exemption application, I don’t know what arguments the municipality and LRA will want to use to reject the application.
But what is the current status? Are the building application and the exemption application with the LRA? Do they have the negative opinion from the municipality? Have you been advised to withdraw the application because otherwise it would be rejected subject to fees?

Yes, building application including exemption application with justification, stating the relevant citations from the statute and that the existing topography of the property does not allow any construction without deviation from the development plan, was submitted to the building authority.

The building authority has made it clear to me several times that it would be best to withdraw it again so they don’t have to reject it.
They even said they don’t know whether it even has to be sent to the committee for rejection.
Furthermore, it was immediately said that the supervisory authority will not deviate from their opinion.

Now my architect first wants to try to get an appointment with the LRA; the responsible lady was only on vacation this week.

For now, I am putting my hope in the LRA.