Gap in building / Access for surrounding properties / §34 Neighbor development

In any case, inflexibility in the shape of the house does not seem to be worth a worse location. Strange birds on the other side of the neighbor's fence are more bothersome than sloping roofs.

But you usually can't know that in advance. In the case of building gaps, you can of course look at the demographics. We intentionally moved to the new development area, more younger people and more children. But it's a complete neighbor lottery.

Is there also a reason why the plot has to be bigger for the "extravagant" Tuscan villa?
130 sqm remains 130 sqm. The offered plot would perfectly suit a bungalow.
Moreover, a Tuscan/city villa is usually understood to be a two-story house.

Because the floor plan is usually cuboid. For example, 8.5 x 8.5 m. The plot doesn't help me much on the side; I prefer to have more garden at the back. Accordingly, a narrower and longer house would stand here parallel to the street (as close to the street as possible).
Tuscan style also works with 1.5 stories and without slopes. However, the eaves height is probably way too high for the plot here.

These are simply ideal notions. I have a friend who built his city villa right in the middle of the plot and therefore doesn't have a proper garden. Each to their own.

With building gaps you can of course look at demographics.
We deliberately moved to the new development area, more younger people and more children.

I mainly meant: I prefer to live with a sloped roof next to the Friendlys rather than in the Pinterest flea in the ear next to the Nouveau Riche, down-and-outs or Flodders. In case of doubt, stupid people are better in old houses, the biological solution is closer there. Although, divorce rates after building also cause quite a bit of turnover.

Tuscany style is also possible with 1.5 stories and without slopes. However, here the eaves height is probably also much too high for the plot.

Tuscany style regularly does not work with regard to eaves height under §34.

I mainly meant: I prefer living with a sloping roof next to the Freundlichs rather than in the Pinterest-flea-in-the-ear next to the Neureichs, Amleuchters or Flodders. In case of doubt, stupid people are better in old houses, the biological solution is closer there. Although, the divorce rates after building also cause quite a bit of fluctuation

I’m rather less interested in the neighbors. I want to be able to lie peacefully in my garden at home, lie on the couch with my wife, or work effectively and undisturbed in the home office. Otherwise, we are often on the go, so I don’t have to waste the rest of my free time on meaningless small talk.

However, I could follow the argument that there are better contact opportunities for the kids in a new housing development. Often, a daycare center is also located in the area.

But I don’t worry about that, there is a relatively new area in town where 20 young families have settled.

I'm rather less interested in the neighbors. [...] Otherwise, we're also out and about a lot, so I don't have to waste the rest of my free time on meaningless small talk.

Neighbors are included in the village, and you are more likely to encounter the type of shallow person in new development areas. But he doesn't want to chat either. If you hang half-dead over the fence with him, he won't call a doctor but the police.

Often a daycare center is also located in the area.

Unfortunately not. The trend is towards a de facto mixed-use residential area (formally residential area, but with a very long list of restrictions).

Unfortunately not. The trend is towards the factual WR (formally WA, but with a long list of restrictions).

Here you have to help me briefly - what do you mean by WR and WA? Thank you!