Architect's suggestions disappointing - What next?

Well. The drafter of the B plan made a non-binding placement suggestion for the properties. Look, what does 5) want? If 5) and 6), that is you and the neighbor below you, do it as drawn in the B plan, that would be quite good. Afternoon sun in the back garden, shade on the terrace. Perfect. Evening sun on the terrace. It would have to be in the SW around the corner. Go to your land and think it through. With measuring tape and stakes. Talk to 5) about what they want. Or do they already have [it]? Karsten

For the second one, I would have thought that he could be placed, so to speak, somewhere between the two types.

That does not exist. The client of your architect is either you or your house provider. So it is either your architect or "your" "architect".

Hybrid types exist at most in the sense that an architect is indeed commissioned by the client, but (due to still lacking practical experience) is nevertheless only a draftsman. Even then, the client would of course have to think along, which in my opinion only makes an inexperienced architect suitable for an experienced client.

There is no tree on the street; currently there is nothing on or in front of the property

You should cautiously expect that it will be derived from the drawing where the green space authority should plant the little trees afterward. There have already been cases where people had lampposts put directly in front of their garage door just because it was shown like that in the plan. The executing forces do not have the discretion to use their judgment. What is not supposed to happen must therefore not appear in the plan in the first place.

If I understand correctly, it means here that we would need a lifting system even without a basement,

Roughly calculate the drains about half a meter below your floor, and the sewer connection also needs a slope. If that in the end lies below the sewer, lifting is necessary.

I think we have this kind of "mixed type" Seriously.

Regarding the planned development, I have already asked the neighbors by the way. Both still don’t know exactly what they want. However, I have heard that No. 7 is considering a house with 2 rental units. Therefore, it would probably be good to shield a bit more in this direction. No. 6 will very likely not build as shown in the plan. He will certainly make his driveway from the west at the bottom, so the garage at the very bottom on the north end and possibly with an adjoining structure to our property boundary. South of that then the house and then towards the south the garden. Then our west side would be mostly free.

Regarding the sewer connection: As already mentioned, this would be positioned quite far down and due to the road slope roughly on the same height level as the house floor slab (considering no basement). Since the sewer is supposedly laid 4.5m below the surface, there should be no problems up to the ground floor. Having a basement might be tight.

I have read here and there that often, just to be safe, the street level is used as a reference. But then there shouldn’t be any basement without a lifting station even on level plots...?

However, I have heard that No. 7 is considering renting out a house with 2 residential units. Therefore, it would probably be good to shield oneself a bit more in this direction.

Can you explain your concerns to me? I know some tenants I would prefer as neighbors rather than other owners. With tenants, there is less of the “my land, so I do what I want” type.

And regarding lifting stations, whether on a slope or not, these parts are not that exotic. But one more part that can break down or occasionally needs maintenance. But when it comes to the absolutely necessary second car, that also doesn’t stop anyone from buying one.

Can you explain your concerns to me? I know some tenants whom I would rather have as neighbors than other owners. With tenants, there is less of the "My land, so I do what I want" type.

end.

I stumbled over that while reading as well. The house is being built according to the development plan, so nothing should be disturbing. And whether there are 2 couples or a family of 4 living there is irrelevant. Or does a tenancy relationship immediately bother?

I know quite a few tenants whom I would rather have as neighbors than other owners. With tenants, there's less of the "My land, so I do what I want" type.

I also once lived for a long time in a very nice house, then the landlady herself moved in. Loud door slamming as if you were alone in the world, the stupid chatter of her coffee circle ruined balcony use, and the dachshund barked itself hoarse competing with its own echo. And that was just the tip of the iceberg.

An example of a nice owner-neighbor situation (type "my boundary, my wall") can also be found here:

With a two-family house—especially in the configuration "both residential units rented out"—I think you are usually even better off: tenants usually change more often than owners, and with two, not both will be idiots.

Number 6 will very likely not build as shown in the plan.

Was I mistaken in my perception that number 6 is yourself?