Preliminary building approval positive, building application criticized position

Hello everyone,
background: the municipality has been working on a draft development plan for 3 years. This naturally includes building envelopes, boundary distances, brick color, floor space index, etc.
The development plan is still in draft form, so it is still not legally binding.

For our construction, we submitted a preliminary building inquiry regarding the size and position of the planned development because the development plan will simply take longer.
We have therefore positioned the house within the future planned building envelope. Since the plot is quite large, we aligned the house along the rear line of the planned building envelope to have space in front of the house for the yard & carport facing the street.
This was approved positively in June 2022.
The justification states that the specifications of the future development plan must be observed.

Now we have submitted the building application with the same position and alignment.
Here, the position of the house is now criticized for being too far from the street. The argument is that the house must fit in according to Paragraph 34 of the Building Code and must therefore be positioned closer to the street.
The future development plan is not used as a basis here, even though this was exactly the case in the preliminary building inquiry.

Is this just “a simple administrative muddle” and can we clarify this? They must also have the positive preliminary building permit including the site plan, right?

We really like the position according to the future development plan. That is why we are very interested in orienting ourselves towards the future development plan.
Our architect will think about it for two days, but I would be very interested to know if anyone has had similar experiences? Do you have any experiences on your side?

I'm not an expert on this, but it only seems logical to me that you have to comply with the currently applicable law. That means you have to orient yourself to the surrounding development. I would see mistakes more in the statement about the preliminary decision. It would have to be checked whether different caseworkers handled it. But as long as the development plan is not legally binding, it is all worthless. There could still be a rejection of the development plan - applying a low probability.

That actually sounds like bureaucratic thinking. However, a preliminary inquiry has legal binding effect. This means everything explicitly confirmed in the preliminary inquiry by the municipality is valid for about 2 years! You can rely on that. Of course, if too much time has passed, I can imagine that the views of the building authority may have changed by now. Asking questions helps in this case and costs nothing.

I suppose the caseworker who handled the preliminary building inquiry assumed that when you submit the building application, the development plan will already be legally binding. However, since the development plan is not yet legally binding, [§ 34] applies.

I assume that the clerk who processed the preliminary building request assumed that when you submit the building application, the development plan would already be legally binding. Since the development plan is not yet legally binding, § 34 applies.

The exciting question is, of course, whether it matters from the builder's perspective how the clerk arrives at approving something. In other words, whether it affects the legal validity.

If the municipality does not want it that way, then the development plan will certainly be amended accordingly.