House Construction Paragraph 34 - City Villa Allowed?

We are planning to purchase a plot of land without a development plan -
Only Paragraph 34 is decisive for the development and therefore my question here:

Our direct neighbors have the following house types:
- House with a gable roof (counts as 1.5 floors?) - corner house to the street;

- Bungalow with a hip roof is the other neighbor
- then there is a gap on our side and a school
- diagonally opposite is a 3-story house
(- 300 meters opposite are high-rise buildings)

We are planning a city villa with a hip roof. How does Paragraph 34 apply?
Would that be allowed or would we have to change the planning?

If there is already a hipped roof in the area, I see no problem at all with a city villa with a hipped roof (2 stories?). Here, a neighbor has built a flat roof extension onto an existing gable roof. Paragraph 34 makes it possible.

Just ask your responsible building authority. They will tell you this definitively.

If I remember correctly, our architect said back then that Paragraph 34 has nothing to do with the roof shape, but rather with floor space index, floor space ratio, clearance areas, number of floors.

Our direct neighbors have the following house types:
- House with gable roof (counts as 1.5 floors?) - corner house on the street;
- Bungalow with is the other neighbor
- then there is a gap on our side and a school
- diagonally opposite is a 3-story house
(- 300 meters opposite are high-rise buildings)

Your description is unfortunately completely unusable. It's best to take several pictures of the built environment, an aerial photo would also be helpful; it starts to become meaningful at about a 50 m radius. Please do so without the jokiness, scribbling over street names or similar. Whether the neighboring house has a full-story attic is not recognizable from the description. A school speaks for a mixed-use area, and 300 m away the legal situation can already be different. High-rise buildings in a §34 area would be at least highly unusual.

If I still remember correctly, our architect said at the time that Paragraph 34 has nothing to do with the roof shape, but with plot ratio, floor space index, setback distances, number of floors.

You probably got that right. Roof pitch does play a role. Floor space index rather not, plot ratio yes. Setback distances as usual, number of floors. Actual building envelopes and possibly building lines. Hopefully, the gap is not enough to create an outdoor area.

I am digging up an old quote of mine here.

"The insertion requirement of § 34 para. 1 sentence 1 of the Building Code is widely misunderstood to mean that a project must fit into its immediate surroundings in every respect. Thus, projects are sometimes rejected with the argument that they do not stylistically blend into their immediate surroundings (for example because the project has a [U] instead of a pitched roof[/U]). This can be countered with a look into the law, which clarifies that roof shapes or other design features are not covered by the insertion requirement, since they neither concern the type or extent of the structural use, nor the construction method or the buildable land area."