Building plot purchase contract / City in first rank due to self-use obligation

Hello everyone,
I have been reading here quietly for some time and now have a question:
After a long wait, I have received the draft purchase contract for a building plot.
One passage strikes me very negatively.

(7) The purchaser undertakes to initially occupy the future residential building on the contractual object as their main residence for at least five years after completion. The decisive date is the date of re-registration at the residents' registration office.

In the event of a breach of the obligation to use the property personally, the municipality xxx may demand a contractual penalty from the purchaser amounting to 20% of the current total purchase price, thus €11,666.00.

To secure this claim, the purchaser consents to the registration of a book mortgage in the first priority of section III of the land register in the amount of the aforementioned sum for the municipality xxx, at the expense of the contractual object; this will be applied for upon execution of the transfer of ownership. The notary pointed out that the entry of the mortgage may reduce the lending value of the property.

Isn't it a bit excessive to want to go into first priority for a pathetic €11k?
What do you think? I will try to have the section III clause removed.

Best regards

Isn't it a bit extreme to want to reach 1st place for a ridiculous 11k?
What do you think? I will try to have the Abt.III clause removed.

Well then someone else will just get the property...

I wouldn't agree as a city if I had specifically developed a concept that only people who want to live there are allowed to build.

They will only do that if you give them another equally good security. A guarantee, or 11666,- in a blocked account, similar to a rental deposit.

Well then someone else can have the property...

I wouldn’t agree as a city if I had specifically developed a concept that only people who want to live there can build there.

That’s not an issue at all. For us it’s clear that we will stay there for years. Otherwise we wouldn’t build (additional note: there are additional requirements regarding the construction obligation).
There are surely 100 other ways to ensure that someone stays there for a long time than to trip up the buyer’s financing with their bank before the first stone is even laid.

One more note, this concerns the second construction phase. Buyers in the first construction phase did not have this clause.

One more note, this is about the second construction phase. Buyers in the first construction phase did not have this clause.

Irrelevant. The development plan could also be different, as in our case. You cannot say that construction phase A is allowed this and that more.

Good luck.