Land prices and standard land value and tips for land search

Regarding the dilemma of landscape protection vs. climate protection, I am of the opinion that climate protection should be clearly prioritized. Actually, construction should be carried out as much as possible now, using as many renewable raw materials as possible and thereby binding the contained CO2 in the long term. This of course should be planned in such a way that shorter distances result, and it must naturally go hand in hand with sustainably reforesting the forest areas that would have to be cleared for this, thereby binding a lot of CO2 from the air. This could also transform our mono-spruce forests into healthy mixed forests. If at some point the climate crisis has hopefully been averted, then attention can be turned back to landscape protection. If the climate issue is not resolved, our soils will long-term turn into a desert anyway, then it will not matter how many single-family houses stood around. As long as environmental protection is directed in two different directions, we will only keep going straight ahead.

This comparison not only falters, it collapses at the first step. Architects design buildings. It may be hard for some to imagine, but there are not just single-family houses (EFHs), there are also other buildings. Therefore, there are plenty of good reasons to focus on certain buildings and deliberately not want to build others.

If someone doesn’t want to design my house the way I want it, someone else will – perfectly fine. Since I have a construction architect in my family myself, I am not unaware that this profession relies heavily on recommendations and references... well, that’s naturally unfortunate... Passive houses, apartment buildings, eco-wood houses, all fine and good, but the main business is and remains the young family with a limited budget who wants to move into their own four walls and specifically into 1.) a single-family house on 2.) their own plot of land. If an architect doesn’t need that, great, then 10 others who ideally understand me and my motivation better will be happy. Quite simple.

Passive house, multi-family house, eco-wood house, all nice and well, but the main business is and remains the young family with a limited budget who wants to move into their own four walls, namely the 1.) single-family house on the 2.) own plot

But that is not quite true. My nephew (the architect mentioned above) says that the single-family house is only a sideline for many good firms. They choose clients who accept 99% of what the firm designs. The main business is public buildings, urban planning, competitions... Money is made with big projects. The average family either goes to a general contractor, "designs" their house with a draftsman with limited building authorization, or just takes a pre-designed timber frame house.

My nephew (the architect mentioned above) says that single-family houses are only a sideline for many good offices.

And what "good" means is defined by your nephew ;) How many architects work in the "good" offices, how many in the not "good" ones, and how many architects are self-employed?

In other words: if the only tool you know is a hammer, then every problem looks like a nail. Or in modern terms: you live in a "filter bubble".

The fewest architects have probably studied for 5-6 years just to design semi-detached houses. That is more of a necessity than a luxury.

No,

And what is "good" is defined by your nephew ;) How many architects work in the "good" offices, how many in the not "good" ones, and how many architects are freelancers?

No, I defined it that way, he probably phrased it a bit differently.
"Good" is a shorthand for an office that knows what it wants, has certain goals and directions it wants to stay true to.

A "good" musician only makes the music they stand behind and does not sell out to just any producer.