Error from the office - No legally compliant and error-free development plan

I am honestly glad that development plans do not come from "business".

Strange argument. They might just as well come from Santa Claus. No, of course a PROFESSIONAL is needed who reflects the will of the people.

The idea that as a private person you build one half like that and the neighbor builds completely differently, this idea, although permissible according to the plan, no one here comes up with.

Are you trying to say you’re smarter up there now?

...And municipal officials or employees are not to blame if people have such ideas. K.

On the contrary, in my opinion they have to weigh all variants and keep contingencies in mind, and especially they must reckon with the most insane ideas of people.

Regarding Katja:
The goalkeeper is knowingly maneuvering himself into trouble. Even here in "my" development area, there are plots where semi-detached houses were permitted. All of these plots ended up in the hands of developers who built and sold semi-detached house complexes on them. That is also correct. The idea that a private individual would build one half in a certain way and the neighbor builds completely differently, that idea, although permitted by the plan, no one here comes up with. At most, two or three families agree on ONE concept and a company, and then everyone pays their share. But like this? Me without a basement, the other with... me now, the other maybe in 2021... What nonsense! And it is not the fault of officials or employees in the town hall if people have such ideas. K.

But the mode is currently being set when selling to individual builders.
The chains in our settlement either went directly to developers or to builder communities. But not to individual noses. This can certainly be controlled in allocation for the good of all.

So, you mean, if the municipality had combined the three plots into one parcel and sold it only as a whole, would it be better? Yes, okay, because then a developer buys it, builds, and then sells 3 terraced houses divided according to WEG. No risk, no fun, but expensive. The other, the liberal approach: I divide by three: three small parcels, three plots, one to the goalkeeper, one to the block warden, one to the house warden. Task: build three terraced houses. Advantage: no developer profits, no division according to WEG. Real possession and ownership. According to WEG only possession. The only thing these three now have to do is: agree! Of course, the office head, paid at A 14, could do a character test before the sale: Are you mature enough for this country? but that also infringes heavily on the citizen’s personality, so such a thing is avoided. Goalkeeper and neighbors should agree, that’s all. K.

with us it was like this: The plot was the last free one in the residential area. Three terraced houses were planned on it. The owner who had bought it from the city – a bricklayer – did not manage to get rid of it that way. He then asked the city if he could simply put a semi-detached house on it instead, for which he already had several interested parties. The city then agreed, which we were very happy about. So the bricklayer sold to 2 interested parties, who could design their floor plans freely and only had to agree on the shell. Brick yes / no, if yes which one Roof color, window color finished.

At my mother’s place – large plot, developer, 5 semi-detached houses each, there were no neighbors for a long time. The basement was then completely built, and her half of the house. The second followed about 6-9 months later, but the basement was already there, so the worst construction sin danger was averted. Although in Bavaria no one builds without a basement anyway

I also find an individual allocation for terraced houses rather strange.

Goalkeeper and neighbors are supposed to come to an agreement, that's all. K.

As an outsider, it's easy to demand. Goalkeeper was even willing to make concessions to reach an agreement. But you can see how reality is. They couldn't even come close to an agreement. The investment is simply too high, the budgets too tight, and the wishes too different.

And the officials or employees in the town hall are not to blame when people have such ideas.

Yes, in my opinion they must weigh all options and keep contingencies in mind, and especially they must reckon with the most insane ideas of the people.

We no longer live in 1970 or even earlier today. Today's elbow-throwing only children naturally have a horizon up to the property boundary even with a 7m wide plot and consider it an immoral request to simply agree with their neighbors on a roof shape. I stick to my statement: the municipality should have protected the public good of the building community here. That the lots of the interested parties would expire again if they did not agree within three months on a common planner (mind you: planner, from OKKD onward each could have been individually commissioned until the cows come home) would, in my opinion, have been no disproportionate restriction. But back to bashing the authority employees: you cannot start such a construction measure cacophony and at the same time forget to plan the swivel radius and counterweights of the cranes. That is truly incompetence in the highest form; the building officials were hardly all pulled together as a special commission from other specialist offices.

Again on development plans: To be honest, I am glad that development plans do not come from "business."

They are not that bad and not uncommon either, keyword "project-related development plan." By the way, we just have a "nice" development plan here in the forum from the municipality, developed by a private planning office: the Aufseesian Meadows with *herrschmeißhirnvomhimmel* detached row houses that stand directly at the roadway.

No, of course a PROFESSIONAL is needed who reflects the will of the people.

Oh dear god, definitely not that. The will of the people is 2m knee walls, boundary distances only to the south (or ideally only on the neighboring properties) or generally a building mass figure that still makes villas buildable on micro plots, and preferably their respective individual taste mandatory for all neighbors. And of course no terrain alterations allowed, so that whatever Pyrrhic victory it is, there absolutely must be no basement under the slab, because that is the part of the house you cannot brag about. Given the moral maturity of many of today’s party-animal builders, an order must be established that protects all from the individual. So, now the world can hate me for my generalizations for the rest of the weekend.