Building an end terraced house - Which technical requirements should be considered?

Personally, I would NEVER want to build like that, to be honest. However, I see and understand the tricky situation with the hardly or not available building plots (let alone the prices).

Those are also two different things: on the one hand a terraced house because of the high land costs, on the other hand this nonsense with separate construction projects. For the former, I am even a lover – a nice terraced house in a beautiful environment, several of them in a row, that is often community and has a campsite atmosphere. That means: tolerance towards close neighbors, little competition with the houses if they are uniform.

I notice that probably very few here have experienced such a case – brilliant

For the idea of not leaving the area development entirely to Häberle or Pfleiderer, the community surely feels quite revolutionarily transparent. Apparently, they have no experience with this yet and have overlooked the small detail that house groups where no one coordinates with their buddies still have to fit together wall to wall.

I have also asked our building authority about the question of development. Let’s see what answer I get from them.

You mean your question about the exact scope of the uniformity requirement applicable to you?

If I understood correctly, the drawing of lots hasn’t fallen into the well yet. You could give the responsible department head (and no lesser person, otherwise the futility is almost certain!) the tip that the problem can be defused by asking individual applicants which company they would like to build with.

or (as others have suggested) the construction of the houses with a developer (meaning awarding the contract to a developer with the corresponding conditions).

I’ll explain again how I imagine it: the applicant says with whom he wants to build. Example: I preferably want plot no. 10. The other applicants from my row (9, 11, 12) want to build with Huber. Option A: I want to build with Huber >> OK. Option B: I don’t care >> then it also fits. Option C: I want to build with Meier >> then I have to go to row 25 to 28 with the other Meier applicants.

In my example, I mentioned "Weberhaus" and "Schwörerhaus" synonymously as prefab builders from the region, and Huber as a synonym for a local solid construction champion.

I find it good that the community doesn’t assign house groups to developers on its own initiative. It could have done that, too: lottery individual rows, so the plot applicants would have had the choice between a Häberle row and a Pfleiderer row.

In the current state, I would consider it most sensible to set a deadline after the lottery by which the winners must have agreed on with whom they will build.

That means they have to meet and talk to each other. If they don’t come to terms, the plots revert and are re-lotted. I would advise the community to allow a lottery swap between the winners: that way, the respective Häberle or Pfleiderer builders can join each other themselves.

This coordination process between them is a good acid test. If war breaks out there, there will be quarrels later at the garden fence as well.

Together with the lottery swap party variant, maybe one is already laying the foundation for a community of settlers of the entire area.

Give the department heads (and no one less, otherwise fruitlessness is almost certain!) the tip that the problem can be defused by asking the individual applicants to state with which company they would want to build.

Laugh; that’s none of one’s business; means if he still wants that, he can restart the procedure; but the treasurer will have something to say about it; he has already planned with the revenues...

I couldn't care less

He also asks the joint applicants that (in my opinion absolutely technically correctly). Announcement in the newsletter, done.

I’ll explain it again how I imagine it: the applicant says with whom they want to build. Example: I preferably want plot No. 10. The other applicants from my row (9, 11, 12) want to build with Huber.

Let’s be honest: most people simply don’t care with whom they build, as long as it’s a fair home builder who builds properly with reasonable prices. The problem lies in the unrestricted possibility that the later owners have free rein regarding height and roof pitch. Just three gable roofs next to each other with side gables with different roof pitches will cause plenty of problems and, when built in a row, will look more than mediocre.

If I have not misunderstood, the draw has not yet been finalized. You can give the responsible department head (and no one less, otherwise the futility is almost certain!) the tip that the problem can be defused by asking individual applicants for a statement about which company they would want to build with.

What do you do when the first one comes and says: "I build through single award!"