ᐅ Building an End-Terrace House – What Technical Requirements Should Be Considered?

11ant schrieb:
He does ask the joint applicants that too (in my opinion, absolutely correct from a technical standpoint). Notice published in the bulletin, done.

Notice has already been published twice in the bulletin – no response received.

ypg schrieb:
To be honest: most people simply don’t care who they build with,

Exactly. Then I say "doesn’t matter," meaning I choose whichever one the others in my row decide on.

hanse987 schrieb:
What if the first person comes and says: "I want to build by single contract!"

That option doesn’t exist. They can only say "with X," in which case they will be allocated a plot situated among other prospective builders who also chose "with X"; or "with Y," the same way; or "doesn’t matter" (which increases their chance of allocation, and they will then find out whether it’s an X or Y row).

goalkeeper schrieb:
Already posted twice in the newsletter – no response received.

I didn’t mean you should look for joint application partners in the bulletin. Instead, the mayor should announce: Call for individual applicants to report back whom they want to build with, so the lottery can be adjusted accordingly.

So again, my example: I want to build on plot 10 and have said "doesn’t matter" or "Huber." The applicants for 9, 11, and 12 want to build with Huber. Then it fits. Or I said "Meier." The applicant for 26 said "Meier," and the applicants for 25 and 27 said "doesn’t matter." Now I get plot 28 in the row from 25 to 28, where Meier will build.

I wanted a mid-terrace house on 10. If I say "doesn’t matter" or, by chance (coordination is not possible here, since no one responded to my search notice), the same as the others in row 9 to 12, then I build on 10. If I say something different, I have to join a suitable other row and will build with my preferred provider, but then an end terrace on 28.

The municipality has five lottery categories (for individual applicants) in my example: for “doesn’t matter / I join in,” for “Huber,” “Meier,” “Häberle,” and “Pfleiderer.” Häberle may well be a prefab house supplier for all I care – the main point is one row = one provider with jointly planning homeowners.

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

11ant schrieb:
Exactly. Then I would say "either," meaning I take whichever my neighbors in my row choose.

But that option doesn’t exist. He can only say "with X," which means he can only be assigned a plot located among other people building "with X"; or "with Y" in the same way; or "either" (which increases his chances of allocation and brings the surprise whether it ends up being an X- or Y-row).

I didn’t mean that you should look for joint application partners in the newsletter. The mayor should write a call: asking individual applicants to report with whom they want to build so that the lottery can take this into account.

So, to repeat my example: I prefer to build on lot 10 and say "either" or "Huber." The applicants for lots 9, 11, and 12 want to build with Huber. Then it fits. Or I said "Meier." The applicant for lot 26 said "Meier," the applicants for lots 25 and 27 said "either." Now I get lot 28 in the row from 25 to 28, which Meier is building.

So I wanted a middle house on 10. If I say "either" or by chance (there is no coordination here, since no one responds to my search notice) the same as the others in the row 9 to 12, it works. If I say something different, I have to move into another suitable row and build with my preferred provider, but as an end house on 28.

The municipality has (for individual applicants) five lottery categories in my example: for "either / I join in," for "Huber," "Meier," "Häberle," and "Pfleiderer." Häberle might be a prefab house provider – the main point being one row = one provider with jointly planning homeowners.

But it’s not that simple. The application deadline is already at the end of January and the allocation takes place in March. How many people can say by then that they have found the right builder? Probably very few.

Furthermore, this is a municipality: they certainly will not overturn their entire procedure, which according to their own statements was decided in many workshops and meetings.

Additionally, the selection of building companies is much too large to really bundle a substantial number of builders at the same time. The plots are also not all the same size or equally good locations. So I wouldn’t simply say, “it’s enough to get any plot somewhere in the development.” I want to precisely specify which one interests us and which does not.

11ant schrieb:
I didn’t mean that you should look for joint application partners in the local newsletter. Rather, the mayor should write a call for individual applicants to report with whom they intend to build, so that the lottery can be updated with this information.

It’s good that we are in Germany; this can’t be done so easily here.

I know of a similar case where they tried to change the award criteria during the ongoing process. The result after much legal back-and-forth was a reissue of the process after 1.5 years.

And when I look at the minutes from the municipality council meeting posted on TE, their focus seems to be more on plots allocated for social housing.

Caspar2020 schrieb:
It's good that we are in Germany; it’s not that simple here.

I know of a “similar” case where they tried to change the award criteria during the ongoing process. The result was, after a lot of legal back-and-forth, a restart of the procedure after 1.5 years.

And if I look at the minutes from the town council meeting at TE, their focus is clearly more on plots intended for social housing

Overall, the development area will include not only semi-detached and terraced houses but also several apartment buildings, which must allocate a certain percentage to social housing and affordable housing. So, it will be a mixed residential development.

Caspar2020 schrieb:
It's good that we are in Germany; it's not that simple there.

Actually, the drawing itself isn’t the issue, but the statement of intent "I am applying for plot 10" should be supplemented with "... and I want to build with Huber" or "... and I agree with the choice of builder made by my fellow row house residents."

The problem that needs to be fixed is that this part B of the application has so far been neglected when asking individual applicants. This does not constitute electoral fraud.

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/