What would you do differently in the next house construction?

If there is a development plan and one adheres to it, there should be no problems.

OT: And what if the regulations are absurd? Time and again you read about problems concerning filling.... I will never understand why no one looks at the whole thing beforehand and thinks about how it will all look later..... in our new development area we have a beautiful hilly landscape..... everyone has come up with their own individual height.....

It was similar for us. A few years ago, construction was only allowed in the Franconian style. The only thing missing was that we had to rebuild the small Rhön half-timbered houses. The municipality did not approve many things, especially in the town center. What was the consequence: vacancies in the town center.

Now, with a new mayor and a new municipal council, the motto is whatever it takes, as long as something gets built.

The healthy mix makes it; who would want to see houses in the Bauhaus style or the many run-of-the-mill city villas in a historic village center.

The healthy mix is what matters; who would want to see houses in Bauhaus style or the many standard 0815 city villas in a historic village center.

In a beautiful, well-maintained historic village center, yes, but in a village center that is alive, where every generation has built, there is nothing uniform. There is half-timbered next to 60s buildings, the school from the 1800s was replaced by a building from the 80s.
Just my grandparents' house, added to around 1900, cow stable moved out at the end of the 20s, barn built in the 40s, in the 50s the cellar suddenly lay below street level, tractor garage built in the 50s, extended in the 80s. Original house with old cellar, year of construction unknown.
Many village centers look like this.

Many villages away from metropolitan areas and commuter belts also have the problem of more people moving away than moving in and births. Better Bauhaus and standard 0815 city villas than decaying historic buildings.

In a beautiful well-maintained historic village center, yes, but in a village center that lives, where every generation has built, there is nothing uniform. There is half-timbered next to a 60s building, the school from the 1800s was replaced by an 80s building.
Just my grandparents' house alone: extended around 1900, cow stable relocated at the end of the 20s, barn built in the 40s, in the 50s the cellar was suddenly below street level, tractor garage built in the 50s, an extension in the 80s. Original house with old cellar, year of construction unknown.
Many village centers look like that.

Many villages away from metropolitan areas and commuter belts also face the problem of more people moving out than moving in and births. Better Bauhaus and standard suburban villas than dilapidated historic buildings

I wholeheartedly agree with you!
I got so upset at the citizens' meeting back then. In the villages, there is by no means a "uniform" architectural style, but houses from the 17th century up to the 60s, and they built very differently than in 1658. And you can see that. And that’s a good thing. The picturesque villages we like so much are not ONE architectural style but have developed over centuries, and each era had its specific requirements and constraints (just those imposed by the building materials available).
Large window areas were not built 150 years ago because they were thermal bridges. Who knows, if they had had well-insulated triple glazing, whether they wouldn’t have made bigger windows even back then? We have that now, so why should I be prescribed window sizes that came about 150 years ago due to material constraints?
And exactly: a village lives. It should. That makes it interesting and lively. I don’t want to live in an open-air museum.
I’d rather have a few architectural sins (for me, for example, the terribly rustic Bavarian-style balconies — the latter are not typical here at all, you find them more in South Tyrol) and buildings I don’t like (others might), but a living, lively village image and no museum piece.
For that, I gladly accept a few suburban villas I would otherwise so much condemn.

the healthy mix makes it, who wants to see Bauhaus-style houses or many standard suburban villas in a historic village center.

MEEE!
Better that than everything looking the same. A healthy mix also includes that.

However, we are quite off topic right now, but I admit the topic is moving me a lot at the moment.

Why not "good" Bauhaus architecture next to an Art Nouveau villa? If the architecture is good, it works!! Every style has its justification, the only question is, what is "good" architecture?

Actually not off-topic, it fits quite well in the thread.