Feedback on our floor plan idea, small building window

... "L"-form... was verbally pre-negotiated with the building authority... ... verbally signaled to us that this form in the necessary size would have no prospect of success... so written... no longer attempted.

The inhibition threshold to reject an application is usually lower for verbally communicated decisions than for issuing an appealable official notice...

By the way, a T-building, which is very similarly divided (and similarly sized) and comes from a renowned regional architect, was the model for this.

And if the existing T-building had been realized with identical builders and a different architect, it would also look different—as with identical architects and other builders.
-> What good is the other planning to you? Nothing!

So much again about the background. Therefore, I do not consider your assessment that "bringing in an architect only for reworking is wrong" to be correct.

Yes, yes...
You or the heirs' community have changed planners often. This causes breaks. At the preliminary inquiry, there was a concept. This was only a rough plan (possibly at the very beginning or even before service phase 3) and was only meant to serve to obtain a later building permit (for a further developed plan).
But now you are using the result of the preliminary inquiry, adding a cube, and want to start construction.
This led to the present unsatisfactory result.

... there are contracts with the engineer/architect, there is the aforementioned framework that the engineer has successfully "negotiated" for us.

Then it is your task to communicate the problems with the existing planning to your contracting party. You need a service phase 3 to successfully further develop the design (even under unsatisfactory conditions).

... also characterizes a good architect... who can well plan individual aspects within given frameworks, if necessary as well as possible.

Agreed.

If this forum claims not only to be a "you need a good architect" forum, but also sketches solutions...

This is very unsatisfactory, just tinkering around the living room does not advance the design. That means complete service phase 3, only leaving the outside walls, finally a reasonable entrance, suitable staircases, functional rooms. And for this to bear fruit, redo phases 1 and 2.
Advice: the above does not cost the world, find an architect nearby who really delves into the planning task. You will recover the costs with 3 square meters saved, so it is cost-neutrally feasible.

:

I can hardly agree with you on any point. Your conclusions do not correspond to the history and are largely based on assumptions, especially regarding the architects involved and negotiations with the building authority.

This evening we consulted another architect from our circle of acquaintances, who likes the floor plan except for a few details (e.g., width of the kitchen door, window arrangement in the west living room). He also clearly emphasized that in the end it is very subjective. We should not let ourselves be unsettled, especially not without concrete alternative proposals.

It's a pity that you don't provide such a proposal even as a rough sketch.

A completely new design plan is not only unnecessary but also time-consuming and, of course, an additional cost factor.

: A completely new draft planning is not only unnecessary but also time-consuming and, of course, an additional cost driver.

Certainly a question of what one is satisfied with and whether one might eventually have to sell the house (see resale value).

I think the situation is somewhat deadlocked. Surely, a house and its planning are always subjective. In the end, it is the client who decides what they like and what they don't. Otherwise, every house would look the same. Nonetheless, one must expect opposing opinions in such a forum; that's what it's there for. Personally, I have already gained a lot for my planning. I think it's perfectly fine that you can't satisfy everyone. It's the tone that makes the music.

Absolutely right. Therefore, criticism is also valuable...... when it is purposeful and offers alternatives. Otherwise, I would not have presented our project here.

As I have shown, a completely new draft planning would not be an alternative for various reasons. Moreover, the proposal is also contradictory to the suggestion from about 2 months ago with almost the same floor plan. The tone was also different.

Without concrete counterproposals, it seems strange.

one question is what one is satisfied with and whether one might have to sell the house at some point (see.

A house in that location can always be sold well in Hamburg. The aforementioned T-house, located in a similar location with a very similar floor plan, was for sale about half a year ago. Approximately the same price range and was gone within a few days. The floor plan is therefore practically already "proven for sale."