Extending walls beyond the roof?!

And again. In the development plan you quoted, it can also happen that the other side counts. Depending on which side the natural terrain slope is lower. You should take that into account and not insist that it is exactly the same as with the neighbor.

I find it very interesting that the mayor promises you to enforce your individual interest against valid resolutions. All I can say is: Good that it doesn’t work out It seems the mayor cared more about his own hat after all (or he sobered up in time).

Is your right of return bound to deadlines? Is it on paper or is it also one of those promises from the mayor?
Who reimburses incidental purchase costs?
To me, this sounds more like theoretical talk. I would assume it is a small municipality. He must be doing well if they develop land, sell it, and then cannot use the money collected further because reclaim rights are still open...

The wall heights measured from the base to the eaves are 5.5m for gable and hip roofs and 7.5m for shed roofs. That seems a bit illogical to me. Since the plot is almost flat, I can’t get two full stories without roof slopes at 5.5m. And actually, I don’t want to see any roof from the outside.

1.
A diagonal, flat gable roof – so diagonal ridge – could still be an alternative....
Also attracts attention.
Whether it offers sufficient story height is another question.

2.
Or a shed roof with a rotated ridge.
Search for: BR Traumhäuser Staffel 5.

P.S.: A roof is a roof... when it includes the waterproofing layer. That is not the case with the roof sails.

I inquired about this topic by phone at the building authority this morning. The clear statement was:
The eaves on a single-sloped shed roof are always on the side where the roof covering has the lowest point.
The natural terrain slope only refers to the side with the eaves. On the other side, even with a shed roof, the intersection with the wall is called a "gable" and is only limited by the total height of the residential building.

Yes, the oral commitment from the mayor was worth nothing as soon as the municipal council openly discussed it. I have to accept that, no problem.
The right of return does not only apply to the buyer; it is clearly stated in the notarized purchase contract and the deed that the municipality is obliged to repay the full purchase price. Of course, excluding the ancillary purchase costs, on which I would have to take a loss. But that’s not a huge deal. It is even regulated that I must start construction within the next 3 years; otherwise, the building plot automatically reverts to the municipality with repayment of the purchase price. Essentially, a building obligation for the buyer, so that the new development area is built up relatively quickly and no building plots remain undeveloped for years. All notarized!

Thank you for your constructive contribution, I have looked at the house with BR. Unfortunately, something is also anchored in the development plan regarding this: "4. Building positioning The buildings are to be arranged with the eaves or gable end (not diagonally) facing the respective street."