Plot selection in the new development area for single-family house - ranking

If noise avoidance is priority 1, I would avoid 20, 21, and 27: I expect the large corner square to be a street soccer field and later a gathering place for the noisy mopeds. It is not clear to me where the multi-family house residents are supposed to park: there are no parking spaces marked along the street, and I also do not see an underground garage entrance. At the daycare center (which probably will not only serve the district's own needs), I expect helicopter parent taxis and also see no traffic management planned for their outflow. Without the basin, I would therefore have suspected that the parceling plan might already be many years old. Overall, the area is planned very old-fashioned; in terms of traffic, I would say "from the eighties." But now apparently only what is drawn here is up for selection. The concept of lay municipal councils has disadvantages as well.

Oh, that

If noise avoidance is priority 1, I would steer clear of 20, 21, and 27: I expect the large corner spot to be a street soccer field and later a gathering place for the buzzing mopeds.

Yes, if it were 1985. In 2025 something like that in a new development area is about as realistic as getting along well with 3-4 neighbors in the long term...

Basically, I assume there will be increased through traffic and bustle in the construction area due to the multi-family houses in the north and west -

Has it been communicated that refugees will be accommodated in the multi-family building? If so, fewer parking spaces might be planned because of that. Otherwise, I do not expect continuous development, which might suggest the building boundary. There will still be enough parking spaces created between the houses and also in front of them, as everywhere else.

At the daycare center (which probably will not only serve the residential area's own needs), I expect helicopter parent taxis and also see no traffic management planned for their departure.

Do you have building plans? I see sufficient stopping and turning areas everywhere outside the building boundaries. A daycare child does not need a parking space. In front of the daycare center it could be four lanes wide.

Considering that there will be no connection to the Kreuzkamp, Backesstrasse is suitable for quieter living. But the Straussstrassenring is also only used by residents.

Was has it been communicated that refugees will be accommodated in the apartment building? Then fewer parking spaces might be planned for that reason. Otherwise, I do not assume that there will be continuous development, which might suggest the building boundary. There will still be enough parking created between the houses and also in front, like everywhere else.

Such accommodation would be marked as a special area in pink in the development plan, like the daycare center. The apartment building block is clearly labeled "g." No public parking spaces are indicated anywhere in the entire planning area.

Do you have building plans? I see sufficient stopping and turning areas everywhere outside the building boundaries. A daycare child does not need a parking space.
In front of the daycare center, there could be four lanes.

Four lanes caused by parent taxis double-parked on both sides is indeed reality, but here an 8m wide street space is drawn (thus probably sidewalk-free with two-way traffic).

Hello everyone,

Thank you very much for the numerous feedback. I will try to address as many things as possible.

What will be pink? A public building? Daycare center?
The question is how the parking situation of the apartment building is.
Personally, I would probably take a plot in the south; with an extended green strip, the plot visually gains size.
(Note, I have not looked at the development plan)

Pink will be a daycare center. It is clear that the parking lot will be located in the northern part of the "daycare center plot." The pick-up and drop-off situation will therefore go directly from Loikumer Weg to the parking lot at the front and from there back out.

Of the plots in the south, unfortunately only number 31 is on the market, and it has the disadvantage of being small (372m², approx. 15m by 25m).

If noise avoidance is priority 1, I would stay away from 20, 21, and 27: I expect the large corner spot to be a street soccer field and later a gathering place for noisy mopeds. I do not see where the apartment building residents are supposed to park: no parking spaces are marked on the street side, nor do I see an underground garage access. For the daycare center (which probably will not only serve the residential area’s own needs), I expect helicopter-parent-taxis and likewise see no traffic management planned for their outflow. Without the pond, I would have guessed that the parceling plan might be many years old. Overall, the area is very old-fashioned in planning; traffic-wise, I would say "from the eighties." But now it seems that only what is drawn here is selectable. The concept of lay municipal councils has disadvantages as well.

For the long “bars” of the continuous development in the west, the exact building design is still unclear. These plots were offered for purchase by developers, who can then build whatever the development plan allows. The three apartment buildings are also not yet finalized regarding the construction. I wrote a bit about the daycare center access above.

Whether the development plan is “old-fashioned” I cannot judge. It is explicitly planned as a mixed-use area and will be implemented as such. There is no choice anyway, as no further new development areas are in sight in our city and we have already been waiting many years.

Has it been communicated that refugees will be accommodated in the apartment buildings? Then fewer parking spaces might be planned for this reason. Otherwise, I do not assume that there will be continuous buildings, which might suggest the building boundary. There will still be enough parking space created between the buildings and in front, as everywhere.

Yes, the three apartment buildings in the north (not the continuous development in the west) are planned for accommodating refugees. Exactly how the buildings will be designed is currently not known.

Considering that there will be no connection to Kreuzkamp, Backesstrasse is suitable for quieter living. But the Straussstrassenring will also only be used by residents.

The plots in the “lower curve” of Backesstraße would therefore also be our favorites. The disadvantage, as noted above for some plots such as number 21, is that there are very many neighbors. The southern part of Straußstraßenring would basically be our favorite, but mostly only semi-detached house plots are there.

Best regards
Malte