200 sqm in traditional style without basement - concept review

Good day everyone,

We are currently in the exploratory phase for the upcoming house construction. The plot is available and the final plan will also be created by a professional architect. Nevertheless, we have some ideas that can be filtered in advance, especially regarding feasibility and practicality. It doesn’t make sense to focus on concepts beforehand that turn out to be impractical and then restart from scratch.

Development plan/restrictions
Plot size: ~1250 m²
Slope: no
Floor area ratio: No development plan
Floor space index: see above
Building envelope, building line and boundary: see above
Edge development: according to BayBO Art.6
Number of parking spaces: 2 garage/2 in front
Number of floors: 2 full floors
Roof shape: hipped roof ~35° on main house, hipped roof on garage, flat roof on connecting building
Style: traditional
Orientation: west
Maximum heights/limits: none
Other requirements: wooden electricity pole on the plot

Requirements of the builders
Style, roof shape, building type: classic Swabian style (window shutters, cornice at roof, ...)
Basement, floors: no basement, 2 floors + expandable attic
Number of persons, age: 2, mid/late 20s, 2 children planned
Space requirement on ground floor and upper floor: approx. 90 sqm each
Office: family use or home office: home office, possibly later bedroom
Overnight guests per year: none
Open or closed architecture: mixed form
Conservative or modern construction: rather conservative
Open kitchen, kitchen island: open kitchen, possibly island
Number of dining seats: at least 8
Fireplace: tunnel fireplace in wall between living and dining
Music/stereo wall:
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: garage, driveway from the south
Utility garden, greenhouse
Further wishes/special features/daily routine, also reasons why this or that should or should not be
Full staircase to the attic (expansion planned),
(bat) dormer in the attic,
separability of living area by a large sliding door (probably surface-mounted due to size),
no children's bathroom upstairs, instead guest bathroom on ground floor with separate toilet,
no "parent section" upstairs, dressing room should be in front of the bedroom,
later separability into 2 separate residential units (dashed line: wall insertion and bathroom conversion),
symmetry of the exterior view (except east/plan right side), exterior view with bay window more or less fixed,
if possible, barrier-free on the ground floor right away (anything can happen ...),
no solar, photovoltaic

House design
Who created the plan:
- Do-it-yourself, reading the forum, house building magazines
What do you particularly like? Why? General requirements are met, the area in front of the office/the stairs can be used as a spacious wardrobe, the living/dining area is also generous and has a highlight with the tunnel fireplace visible from all sides.
What do you dislike? Why? See fundamental question
Price estimate according to architect/planner: /
Personal price limit for the house, including fittings: 575k with own work (excluding land/outdoor facilities)
Preferred heating technology: district heating, empty conduits should still be laid for possible air heat pump or geothermal heat pump

If you have to give up, on which details/expansions
- can you do without: storage upstairs, size of kitchen/dining area (as long as at least 8 people year-round, in exceptional cases 12-14 people can still be accommodated)
- cannot do without: fireplace, separability of residential units, stairs to attic, exterior view (but surely still leaves some leeway)

What is the most important/basic question regarding the floor plan?
It is often said that anyone can build big. The rough external dimensions (whether 12.5 x 9.8, 12.0 x 10.0 or 11.5 x 9.5 - does not really matter) are more or less fixed, as well as the exterior appearance (which we believe fits best on the plot). This still complicates the room planning somewhat. But these are compromises we are willing to make. In my opinion, space is still wasted in front of the kitchen unit in the dining/kitchen area, also the upstairs bathroom is very large in terms of area, but does not look big. Likewise, the pantry is on the south side and the guest bathroom with shower also faces the street (albeit used only by 3 residents). It does not have to be optimized inch by inch, as we have enough space inside and outside. But it would be a pity if the house becomes a huge bunker whose spaciousness inside is lost due to planning errors.

The attached plan only has one terrace door. Actually, a U-shaped kitchen is preferred. But an island would also be conceivable so that all windows on the west side can be turned into doors.

One idea is to scrap the bay window and instead install 4 windows on the west side, both downstairs and upstairs. The plans are (almost) aligned to north. The question of whether the garage is built with a corner directly on the plan-right boundary or whether 3m distance is left for a carport etc. is still open. The bathroom fittings can hopefully be seen as a "work in progress." The rest of the furnishings can be considered "as planned." Exterior walls 42.5, interior walls 17.5, garage exterior wall 24.0.

I would be very happy to hear about major flaws and possibly suggestions for improvement.

Good that you have clear ideas. I do not share the notion of symmetry, but you can certainly not care about that and are welcome not to.

The technical room / airlock will prove to be very small.
I think having space for sleeping in the office is a good idea. :p
With the layout, the living room can also be in the north. All views away from the window and towards the TV.
With the size and shape, the usefulness of the pantry is questionable.

It does not sit well with me to be wastefully generous with space in the dining room and hallways and to shrink other areas below an acceptable usability threshold.

What strikes me first:
How many linear meters of closet can the dressing room take exactly? (The drawn closet does not have wardrobe depth)
The staircase would have to be way too compact to work ;)
The windows on the left side of the plan offer no views and no adequate lighting into the interior.

The hallway to the corridor, the airlock to the hallway, the toilet to the bathroom, the bathroom to the washing... I'll just leave that uncommented, so without evaluating these dependencies of rooms.

Full staircase to the attic (expansion planned),

I like that. The idea.

possible later division into 2 separate residential units (dashed line: insert wall and remodel bathroom),

would work here.

if possible, already barrier-free on the ground floor (something can always happen ...),

The shower is not suitable for that.

In the dining/cooking area, space is in my opinion still wasted in front of the kitchen unit,

That’s because of the bay window.

the bathroom upstairs is also very large in terms of area, but does not look large.

It is also ruined by the interior laundry room.

The attached plan has only one terrace door.

Who among you doesn’t like light, nature, or a garden?

I suspect that you simply want to pack in as much as possible, all contingencies and wishes, and that's why the floor plan doesn't seem coherent to me. In the entrance area, I count countless doors, which makes it appear restless. The direct entrance/door area, on the other hand, is downright tiny, only to then have to turn left to enter a suddenly unnecessarily large anteroom (because of the later separated living area). In terms of the feeling of spaciousness, you would probably have to reach the living area more centrally; instead, you shuffle close along the kitchen furniture and end up almost in a "hall" with too much space again; next to it is the separated, small living room, also with little space and even fewer windows. If I read this correctly, you first decided on the exterior shell or shape and are now trying to squeeze your floor plan into it. In my opinion, that is exactly the wrong way around, because your diverse existing wishes and needs constantly hit walls or boundaries. It is the search for the egg-laying wool-milk-sow, which often ends up in a lazy compromise. The "professional draftsman" you commissioned (so probably not an independent architect) will occasionally reach his limits trying to implement the wishes. How could he appropriately implement them when the exterior shell almost forbids any freedom in the interior design? I would, contrary to what you write, start from scratch and reprioritize; you are not 30 years old, so age planning could be omitted. If you plan from the inside out, you have the sun where you want it and also space where it should be. The bathroom on the upper floor is the best example; nothing really fits there. Nothing has happened yet.

In the entrance area, I count endlessly many doors, which makes it appear restless. The direct entrance/door area, on the other hand, is downright meager, only to have to turn left to get into a suddenly unnecessarily large antechamber (because of the later separated living area).

Uih, I also wanted to highlight that point: no invitation of the house. It does not welcome me, it does not pick me up as a visitor. When I finally discover the glass door to the all-purpose room in the dark hallway, I enter a dark large room lit by a few loopholes. Somehow creepy.
But okay, let’s leave out the all-purpose room, then there is the mega strange corridor which also gets no light. (Psst, like an adventure game ;) )

The hallway to the corridor, the airlock to the hallway, the toilet to the bathroom, the bathroom for washing... I’ll just leave this uncommented, that is, without rating these dependencies of rooms.

The entrance courtyard to the entrance... I forgot.
And the conclusion: they do nothing to each other. On the contrary: one takes away the benefit, the positive, the meaning of the other. In the bathroom, you have already noticed it yourself, without recognizing the reason.
I would say: too much experimentation was done on it and thereby completely missed the mark.

Thanks already for the first honest and also helpful answers. I will not go into each point individually now, as there are quite a few, but they almost all come to the same conclusion.

It is indeed the case that we planned from the outside in. That is not really optimal and most people rightly say that it is actually wrong. I don't want to sound resistant to advice, but the/exterior view is simply important to us. We just like it. In my layman's opinion, however, with the plot size and a shell construction area of about 120 sqm, this view or this style should roughly be achievable with our requirements for the interior. Our builder will manage that too, I am pretty sure. The exact number of windows or exact width is also not set in stone. What is important is the style and what it stands for.

But now I definitely know that I don't even need to show up with this draft. The points mentioned are also immediately noticeable when you are addressed about them. That probably is what distinguishes the professional from the layman. So I won't even try to explain or justify. Many thanks for this. New sheet of paper...