In the architecture sector, single-family housing projects are often linked to demand from private clients, without arousing very much interest from developers, who seek higher returns on other real estate assets. For any owner, the construction of a home is perhaps the biggest investment of their life, and success or failure will therefore depend on the right decision. This paper presents a study of three different structural alternatives that are applied to a terraced house to facilitate decision making by a self-promoter, based on multiple criteria and taking sustainability into consideration. The methodology used allows us to identify the structure and to evaluate the different alternatives proposed here in order to find the optimal option. A comparison is drawn between a traditional reference solution, a pre-cast design and finally a technological option based on an integral reinforced concrete structural system. Although the technical feasibility of these last two solutions has been proven, they have not yet received enough attention from researchers to allow the thermal envelope of the building to be solved at the same time as the structure itself. The last of these alternatives achieved the best valuation, although it is neither the most widely used alternative or the quickest to build. This study demonstrates the practical versatility of a method that is seldom used in residential construction and only rarely used for single-family homes. We evaluate three alternatives for optimizing the structure and enveloping walls of a self-promoted, terraced house from a sustainability perspective. The study provides a set of indicators for assessing the environmental, economic and social aspects of a building throughout its life cycle. The sustainability index of the structural envelope obtained in this way allows a self-promoter to prioritize solutions to ensure its global sustainability. •Each self-promoting decisions influence the global model of sustainable construction.•Self-construction prioritizes economic and functional aspects in the life cycle.•Three alternatives comparing traditional structure with non-conventional MMC systems.•A balance between the indicators favours a better sustainability index.•Reinforced concrete technology in housing reduces 10% lead times and 23% cost.