Thorny tree hedge - the city as an encroaching neighbor

We have been in talks with the city for some time now about purchasing a plot of land.

About the location: The plot is attached to a building (west side), the traffic-calmed street is to the north, and to the east and south the plot transitions into a meadow (to be preserved according to the development plan). According to the development plan, on both the east and south sides, "at least two rows of hedges (saplings, height 150/200cm, planting distance 1m) must be planted and permanently maintained."

The situation: The municipal parks department had already created facts before our purchase and planted 5 (!) rows on both sides. In each row, 2m tree seedlings (beech, hazel, ...) alternate with thorny bushes (blackberry?). The first row is already 20cm on our property, so it can be foreseen that some trunks begin exactly on the boundary. Aside from the significantly darkened plot including leaf debris in autumn.

The questions:

1. Normally, distances to neighboring properties are strictly regulated and would definitely be undershot here. Does this also apply when this is municipal land?

2. Could "bought as seen" apply here, meaning we only acquire the property after planting?

3. The specified height in the development plan is massively exceeded within a very short time (tree heights). Are these only minimum heights here?

4. Do you have any further advice for us? The blackberries will surely spread well. The earthworker has already said he will probably have to run over one or the other hedge anyway.

I would hesitate to buy from the city and then clear their brush on the municipal neighboring property. That bodes nothing good

Do you have any further action tips for us?

Speak

Speak

Of course, we will discuss that with the city on Friday. That is precisely why I am interested in questions 1-3, so as not to show up there completely clueless.

Regarding 1. AFAIK the city can also set other distances in the development plan. You yourself write that a building adjoins to the west (although awkwardly phrased, I hope I understand it correctly), i.e., zero boundary distance. Of course, then bushes with zero boundary distance can also be allowed. The height then also depends on the pruning.

Regarding 2. Morally yes, legally it would probably be important to raise objections promptly after the purchase. The purchase contract is probably also relevant. In any case: Only with my lawyer and open ended.

Regarding 3. One would need to know the entire development plan, then possibly, open questions can best be answered by the author of the B-plan (the city). It only says "height" (in your quote) apparently without min or max ...

Regarding 4. First, find another earthworker. Otherwise, plan to make up for the damage caused by the earthworker (additional construction costs). Ideally in consultation with the city. Otherwise, you have to decide whether you want the property. At the boundary, a curb/edging stone would be good. Possibly with root barrier, rhizome barrier. You cut off the rampant vines, you process the blackberries into jam or liqueur.

I do not believe that the planting distances to neighboring properties (neighbor rights) play a role here. And the reason for this is that I do not need to observe neighbor rights with respect to public properties/the street, as they do not apply there. So I can plant a row of sequoias directly against the fence, provided the fence borders public land. Planting distances must only be observed with private individuals = neighbors. Therefore, the city probably also does not have to observe planting distances in reverse.