Floor plan - 135 sqm, 1.5 storeys, gable roof

Please, no drama, ladies!

Let's just check off the topic of whether we would have signed such a construction contract. And accept the framework conditions as given, which are:

1) "One and a half stories" with a knee wall of 0 to 120 cm and a gabled roof pitched at 35 to 55°;

2) Desired financing for 135 square meters that should not be overturned.

Square meters can be calculated in different ways, which is why the builder wants the contract to specify what he means by that. The methodologies of DIN and the Living Space Ordinance differ - not only in the calculation itself, but also in the naming and accounting of living spaces, usable areas, and circulation areas.

In this case, the builder wants to be paid equally for every built room, whether it is a living room or a heating room, and no deduction for plastered surfaces. I do not share the fear that he wants to fully count partial areas between 120 and 200 cm ceiling height.

I find a knee wall in the range of 100 to 120 cm optimal: then the issue of the low wall is completely off your mind. One of my mantras is well known: a knee wall only makes sense if it completely replaces a low wall - and that could be the case here. Knee wall 0 and then a low wall with sloping ceilings as storage space is, in my opinion, not the best, because sloping ceilings and energy saving regulations are not a dream couple. The alternative "larger ground floor and 0 knee wall" I would therefore not completely discard, but would pursue with little warm enthusiasm.

I explain the wall thickness as follows: 15 cm expanded clay, 14 cm external thermal insulation composite system, 2 cm plaster on the outer wall; interior walls probably 15 cm also expanded clay; interior walls 12 cm I could imagine as drywall.

And unfortunately, with the one and a half story building, it is just as large as with a city villa, or am I missing something here?

Even according to DIN, the low areas were degraded and unused sloping ceilings were not counted at all.

That was also exactly my idea. Just tell him that it is supposed to be a bungalow. I'm curious about the reaction.

I'll just call the responsible municipality myself and ask about it there. Let's see.

Not DIN 277 but WoFiV

Approximately ... on the upper floor it is probably slightly smaller.

I would also concentrate my efforts on a rectangular bungalow with a gable roof.

I do not share the concern that he wants to "fully" include the partial areas between 120 and 200 cm in height.

If he is referring to 135 sqm? I can already see them

Please, no dramas, ladies!

Let’s check off the topic whether we would have signed such a construction contract. And accept the framework conditions as given, which are:

1) "One and a half storeys" with 0 to 120 cm knee wall and a saddle roof pitched at 35 to 55°;

2) Financing desired not to be overturned for 135 square meters.

Square meters can be calculated in various ways, which is why the builder wants the contract to specify what he means by that. The methodologies of DIN and the Residential Space Ordinance differ – not only in the calculation itself, but also in the naming and accounting of living spaces, usable areas, and traffic areas.

The builder wants to be paid for every built space in the same way, whether it is a living room or boiler room, and no deduction for plastering areas. I do not share the fear that he also wants to fully count the partial areas between 120 and 200 cm height.

I find a knee wall in the range of 100 to 120 optimal: then you can completely forget the issue of the dwarf wall. One of my mantras is known to be that a knee wall only makes sense if it completely substitutes a dwarf wall – and that could be the case here. Knee wall 0 and then dwarf wall with side walls as storage space is, in my opinion, not great because side walls and energy saving ordinance are not a dream couple. The alternative "larger ground floor and 0 knee wall" I wouldn’t completely dismiss, but would pursue with little warm affection.

I explain the wall thickness as follows: 15 cm expanded clay, 14 cm ETICS, 2 cm plaster on the exterior wall, interior walls 15 cm probably also expanded clay, interior walls 12 cm I could imagine as drywall.

Even according to DIN, the low surfaces were/were counted down and unused side walls not at all.

Where were you all day? Wonderfully summarized, thanks And: The wall thickness is constructed exactly as you said.

Unfortunately, I see it like kbt09: The builder also fully counts the partial areas. But I’m still trying to achieve something there. We’ll see... So DIN 277 is no use here, correct?