Challenge at a 1/4 circle house ;)

In the old thread I basically said everything that there is to say about this design, in my opinion, in a "final" manner, but I am happy to summarize it here once again:

The "foundation" of the design is an unfortunately chosen paradigm: the OP imagines a straight side of the plot as the noblest garden side and strives to push the (maximally exploited) built-up area with as little "waste" as possible into the "round corner" of the plot in order to keep that side free. He assumes he is doing himself a favor by following every square centimeter of the plot boundary with the floor area ratio, thus gaining the entire "remaining plot" as a contiguous garden area. In fact, however, he achieves a Pyrrhic victory, i.e., pulls useless residual areas into the house and pays for it with a complicated floor plan geometry. In other words, this is literally taking the idea of building the first house for an enemy.

Already the first three basic assumptions were wrong, namely:
1. maximum utilization of floor area makes one happy and
2. it is holier to leave the more favorable geometry to the recreational area (pastor’s piece) and rather challenge the building area with it, and that
3. only a congruence of house and plot outline would allow the best possible unimpaired remaining area for the garden;
now the OP adds a fourth misconception on top of that: namely that misconception number three would be "optimized" by strictly laying out the quarter circle as "rounded" instead of only approximately as a polygon.

However, this "improvement" brings little secondarily – even a fine scale hardly tips here – and first only brings an advantage if at the same time the focus is placed at the center of this circular segment line (that is where you stick the compass), where the core of the floor plan lies.

The only "(Pyrrhus) optimized" points are instead the neuralgic spots where sharply tapering residual areas create complication-laden connection details. The only drafts I see as suitable here are Katja’s – and even these only from the cubature perspective; the task "what must my house include, and for whom" must still be solved by the OP as a first step. That would be the actual first step, not "how do I use my expensive plot on the motto better to twist my stomach than giving anything to the host"!

The architect probably also followed the wrong marching order slogan issued by the OP too closely and has accordingly turned a plain six from a template (topic missed) into a six plus (topic missed but more practice apparent). My relative favorite is the L-shaped basic form graphically depicted by Katja (which also already made much better qualitative use of the plot, so would not only be a house improvement) and my absolute favorite would probably be, following Yvonne’s suggestion, to build a straight east side with right-angled connected north and south sides and to lay out the west side either as an L or slanting following the plot widths.

my absolute favorite would probably be to follow Yvonne's suggestion and build a straight east side with right-angled connected north and south sides, and to design the west side either as an L or slanting according to the widths of the plot.

??? Do I understand correctly that instead of the curve you simply want to run a slanted wall? And what would the L look like?

Do I understand correctly that instead of the rounding you simply want to put in an angled wall? And what would the L look like?

You can see the L as you showed it; and - now just basically as an outline, without fitting it into the floor area ratio - overlaid in pink what I mean:

like pink overlaid what I mean: [ATTACH alt="32772-synthese.png"]39636[/ATTACH]

That’s what I feared. That wouldn’t be my thing at all. The sharp angle in the southwest is good for nothing and it’s ugly besides. :P

Hi

Whether to use the angle or not depends on the requirements and the floor plan. Ugly or not is also a matter of taste. In the floor plan it may look unusual, but in the views and later in the object it then fades away. In my own use, in the rental property, and the garage, I also follow the building boundary with some walls. Although the plots are sufficiently large, in my opinion there is nothing against using them optimally.

Olli

The acute angle in the southwest is useless

That was just a purely schematic representation; the slope can also be much more subtle. I only brought it up because you reject Yvonne’s suggestion of the rectangle by saying that the result could become very narrow. And precisely that can be avoided in two ways: with the course of the fourth wall "stepped" (= L) or "slanted," both of which I consider worth considering.