Architectural house floor plan with staggered floor

exactly. Not everyone wants to carry around 2-3 flat screens… :D

My assumption was that the OP finances the house from his income. Unless it is explicitly a specialized IT job, from a certain salary category onwards you also get paid for thinking. Thinking does not require large screens. A laptop and a phone for notes and communication are sufficient; a larger screen is a matter of comfort but does not help with thinking.

Note: The thing above the quote does not belong there - even if it would fit. ;)

I don't quite understand - does this refer to the renunciation of any cost inefficiency in the construction combined with unredeemable cost optimism?

Among other things, but definitely yes. An imposing building is being developed without the question of terrain modeling being concretely answered; as a result, an air bubble that cannot be moved away from the living room is called a "lounge" (and a little room a home office), the basement raises some questions ... all this makes me think much more of a self-promoter than just a dreamer and artist.

The architects have wonderful references on the webpage and apparently a less cost-sensitive clientele.

Was the star chef of this design mentioned here?

Was the star chef of this design mentioned here?

I don’t know how to link other posts, in June it was Ferreira-Verfürth from Meerbusch who wrote.

In the end, an air bubble that couldn’t be massaged away from the living room is called "Lounge" (and a little room Homeoffice), the basement raises some questions

The answers to the "open questions" become clear to me quickly.
The lounge is an additional place to sit and enjoy the evening sun – why should there be only one seating area in a large room?
The little office room seems to come from the OP’s statement that he hardly needs (or wants?) space.
No more basement is needed, the building services are well tucked away there and do not disturb.

Sometimes there is more than just orientation by price per square meter, which I would see here at a reasonable ceiling height and fittings matching the design in the order of 4000€. After all, the house would become a caricature of itself if technical equipment, area premiums and details like windows, stairs, doors, etc. were chosen in budget variants.

I don't know how to link other posts, in June it was Ferreira-Verfürth from Meerbusch who wrote.

Thanks, then I'll take a look at them later. By the way, I only know how to link here when I'm at the desktop. On the go, I only give likes and simple comments here; even divided quotes are tedious on mobile :-(

The answers to the "open questions" become clear to me quickly. [...] You simply don't need more basement, the building services are well hidden and do not disturb there.

Unfortunately, the house entries here are built over, which disturbs many suppliers. And even where Schmalhans is not the lead player, the phenomenon of the disproportionately slow shrinking partial basement on the cost side should be known to a planner. With this mini basement, the wagons have long since been left behind with the money saved anyway. I should probably add another dimension to my basement rule.

After all, the house would become a caricature of itself if the technical equipment, area compensations and details like windows, stairs, doors etc. are selected in saving variants.

Oh, don't remind me of the architect houses with plastic windows!

What confuses me:
The space requirement on the upper floor is extremely high. Also, the fact that now, in addition to bedrooms (number of people) plus a children's bathroom, one room each has to be used for a home office could be discussed—where or how living is supposed to work at all. In large cities, building single-family homes is prohibited, while others really inflate things. Blah blah, I’m digressing…
I don’t see any inflation here in the room sizes in general. Everything looks quite normal. Everywhere 1-2 sqm more than in a 160 sqm house…
But rooms would have to move into an additional stepped floor. Despite flooding, the technical equipment is relocated to a basement so that the tower somehow doesn’t look like Lego from a drone’s view alone (oops, all the recesses in the ground floor facade are not reflected on the upper floor)... if you look at the building in section, you almost see a spinning top or a taller UFO. That should make you think (if you get paid for thinking according to ;))
The ground floor could contain technical equipment AND a stylish home office AND be generous if you manage the sqm better and do without these recesses. At least less would be more there.
With architectural planning, you can even fit a sauna on the upper floor.
I don’t see 4000/sqm if you straighten the corners. But you can certainly add the 20% to the proposed 7 that you’re used to from architectural calculations.