Floor plan approx. 170 m² single-family house, without basement with carport

Photovoltaics on the south side is certainly not bad. But west/east orientation has advantages when it comes to self-consumption.

A photovoltaic system will generate so much in summer that you cannot consume it all yourself. The weak point of photovoltaics remains the winter in our latitudes, especially in the north. There are wonderful diagrams and tools here that calculate a forecast of the expected yield based on orientation and angle. Nicely presented as a diagram over all months of the year.

But true – I didn’t think about the shadow casting. It is certainly shorter with east/west gables. However, we are currently planning with 2 full floors or a knee wall of 2.80 meters, but maybe for the north garden it would be worth considering reducing that to, for example, 1.80 meters. That would also save a bit of money ;)

Different concepts, different considerations. It has to be consistent, among other things with the planned windows. Roof slopes and skylights vs. full room height and normal windows. The roof slope also plays a big role.

A photovoltaic system will generate so much in summer that you cannot consume it all yourself. The weak point of photovoltaics in our latitudes is and remains winter, especially in the north. There are wonderful diagrams and tools that calculate a forecast of the expected yield based on orientation and angle. Nice as a diagram over all months of the year.

That is true, but with east/west orientation you have sun from early morning to late evening and thus electricity from photovoltaics available for longer per day. Therefore, east/west is optimal when it comes to self-consumption. For example, PVGIS also shows this for us. But as I said – south is by no means bad and would therefore also suit us. The points you and Katja mentioned are definitely more important to us.

Different concepts, different considerations. This has to be consistent, among other things, with the planned windows. Roof slopes and roof windows vs. full room height and normal windows. The roof slope also plays a big role.

Yes, that’s true. We are very happy to receive such great support here. However, we want to avoid roof windows if possible. Therefore, I think the knee wall should not be lower than 1.80 meters.

I think this would be better in terms of price/performance:

[ATTACH alt="übersicht.jpg" type="full"]72550[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH alt="EG.jpg" type="full"]72549[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH alt="OG.jpg" type="full"]72548[/ATTACH]

110 sqm fully utilized. For that, a simple design. Media is not large, but with a pantry and an extra utility room on the upper floor, that should be enough. The staircase is a tight landing without much room for changes.

So far, we like the floor plan best :) The staircase with landing is great. Would there be any objection to providing a storage room under the staircase? Are the dimensions for staircases with landings standardized? We need to check whether our supplier offers a staircase with landing in the dimensions on the quote. For the utility room on the ground floor, we also need to check whether it can be that small. The utility room upstairs is quite large, but I suspect that all the technical equipment needs to fit on the ground floor. If necessary, it might also be possible to make the house 30 cm longer. Upstairs, the utility room and the office are even larger than we need. However, we probably lack space in the bedroom for our bed + nightstands. Our bed is 2.20 meters wide and our current nightstands are 0.73 meters wide – although there are certainly narrower ones. But I think we would need 3.20 meters to have space for bed + nightstands. But perhaps that would already be enough if the house has to be adjusted to 9 meters in length anyway due to the technical room.

I also like it very much!
What occurred to me while reading (I'll skip searching for the quote)
If you sign up for about 110 sqm and are told that the additional sqm cost such and such (I think it was around €2000?),
then the general contractor (GU) naturally talks about the same house equipment, e.g., a house with 3 rooms and 7 windows. If you then plan over 60 sqm more and 2-3 additional rooms come out, which again need their own windows as well as separate heating circuits, electrical installations, etc., it may be that the stated additional price is not sustainable.
I would inquire with the GU in good time if I were you.

I believe we were unclear about what we signed with the general contractor because you write that we would be planning over 60 sqm more. The mentioned 110 sqm that we signed with the general contractor always referred to the floor area – not the living area. Purely in terms of area, we would therefore come out roughly at zero with Katja’s design. The approximately 2000 euros more also referred to per sqm floor area. The number of windows could of course be different and lead to additional costs. But if we, for example, lowered the knee wall from 2.80 to 1.80 meters, we could in turn save a few thousand euros. Due to the northern orientation, I think that would make sense anyway. But in any case, we will seek a conversation with our general contractor next week.