Full floor in the attic? Bungalow or 2-story house?

I have now looked at the development plan. I did not find the "extra Anlagen 1.1. to 1.3" with terrain sections mentioned therein, from which explanatory examples could be derived.

From a formal-legal perspective, the plan seems to me to be contestable, as the wording regarding the number of full floors is contradictory and thus violates the principle of legal certainty. However, apparently no one has challenged it in 13 years, if it remains continuously valid.

Read with understanding (and knowledge of regional customs), one can deduce that the single-story houses are meant to look like "one-and-a-half-story" houses, but the building authority does not mind if these attic floors are legally full floors (in the sense of being more than three-quarters the size of the ground floor); the same applies to basement floors (which could legally be full floors if they protrude on average more than 1.40 m above the ground).

The intention of the plan maker is obviously the external Franconian character of the building structures (no or only moderate knee walls, no flat-roof houses with recessed upper floors).

The plan also comments on dormers: they are to be real dormers, i.e. with a little piece of roof underneath - thus not as "Zwerchhäuser" (as they are called when they grow directly out of the outer wall).

Ok, thanks a lot already for your help and the answers! 75cm knee wall is of course actually not very much for an upper floor, so we will now have to reconsider our plan thoroughly.

Best regards

75cm knee wall is of course actually not much at all for an upper floor,

That's exactly my opinion: a knee wall that does not fully replace a dwarf wall is nonsense. But: we have not had this case here for the first time, this is probably the current development plan fashion in Franconia. This development plan does not want city villas, Bauhaus houses, or captain's gables. But that's also nice if a residential area doesn't look like bean soup with rice and raspberries, just because a few people from Düsseldorf are building in Bavaria.

From a formal legal perspective, the plan seems attackable to me

Oh, Elephant, you are being too harsh on the city planners.

because the wording regarding the number of full floors is contradictory

I cannot see that. The entire development plan allows two full floors. And so that the houses on the edge of the new development area on the valley side do not end up appearing four stories high through clever balancing of the full floor limits, the clauses with attic and basement have been included. Since all roof types are expressly permitted, villa-style and Bauhaus-style buildings are also possible; however, the planner has to be a bit creative.

more than 3/4

BayBo 1998 Art. 2 (5) ...over at least two-thirds of their base area have a height of at least 2.30 m ...

more than 1.40 m

... bottom edge of the ceiling on average at least 1.20 m ... Where were you?

therefore we will now have to thoroughly reconsider our project.

Then describe your dream house, so we might be able to give an opinion on whether there is a chance for approval.

Since explicitly all roof types are allowed, city villa and Bauhaus-style building forms are also possible;

If I haven't misread, flat roofs are subject to a minimum roof pitch, and city villas to an eaves height. That practically restricts the "all" roof types again.

If I haven't misread, a minimum roof pitch is required for the flat roof, and a eave height for the city villa. That practically restricts the "all" roof types again.

You are, of course, right; what is usually understood as Bauhaus is not possible like that, and even a so-called city villa will appear different depending on the viewing direction, just because of the sloping site. That's why I used the formulation "city villa- and Bauhaus-like". However, since the eave height refers to the street level and depending on the topography of the building plot a 20° shed roof can appear flat-roof-like, I still see plenty of design possibilities.