Floor plan assistance: 216 sqm single-family house with granny flat & double garage

We found a house near Frankfurt/Main where construction is about to begin soon. It comes from a developer. Currently, there is an old house on the property which is being completely renovated. It will be turned into 3 condominiums. Our house will be at the back end, a detached single-family house with about 216 sqm. Two garages should be integrated into the house along with one parking space, which we can buy additionally.

I wouldn’t call it a "single-family house," but more fittingly "condominium 4 and 4a," because other than as a homeowner’s association (WEG) I cannot imagine the offer in this overall building context. And a "condominium with a granny flat" is a really absurd nonsense for someone who has killed their parents ;-)

Basically, we can still change everything on the floor plan.

We have already changed the floor plan because we want to prepare to rent out the upper floor someday.

I rather think you have already changed too much and the "original" wasn’t going to be a masterpiece either, but at least not such spiced-up crap. Without the intricate overall conception, I would have only suggested splitting the "house" differently (for example, not designating the attic as a granny flat). But as it stands, I advise nothing in detail, only to drop the offer. Leave the developer with his problem alone and keep looking for yourselves. Here, space without living value would be built solely for the purpose of maximizing the economic return of the land. If I were a developer, I would tip my hat to the colleague for this stunt – as a customer-oriented building guide, I just find this offer simply audacious.

May I ask how much the BT costs?

First of all, thank you very much for all the opinions! I am aware that this won’t be so easy. I just thought that on almost 50 sqm something should be doable.

The floor plan is too messed up to achieve anything with small changes. But if you are really after a genuine second potential living unit – and not just trying to get the second subsidy – then I would build so that you could retrofit an entrance and a staircase in the storage room by the garage. And then adjust the floor plan upstairs accordingly.

It can also be major changes, we are relatively free… could you explain your idea about the retrofittable staircase in more detail? I somehow can’t imagine it.

With 216m2 I would also design the main living area more generously. How tight is it going to be with the TV wall? For us, cooking, eating, and living stretches over almost 12m in length. That’s not small, but not big either, since there is also a piano, a fireplace, and a 3m wide table placed lengthwise in this room.

The architect is rather careless when it comes to furnishing. He just places things in the room… we would arrange it differently. Of course not the chair backs directly against the TV.

Leave out the 2nd living unit. Who knows what will happen someday. What doesn’t work today might be normal tomorrow. There is little space downstairs for the house size and everything feels a bit too much upstairs. You come home with a Maxi Cosi and a child at your hand. Where do you put what? The dining area consists of 2 benches and a relatively narrow table. High chairs, sliding the chair away so the baby bump fits in is impossible.

We had considered making a wardrobe in the "common hallway" under the spiral staircase. You can also push the stroller under there. It won’t always be there anyway. Jackets can be hung on the left wall. But yes, the tenant would walk past it.

I wouldn’t call it a "single-family house," but rather more accurately "condominium 4 and 4a," because unlike a WEG, I can’t imagine the offer in this overall building context. And a "condominium with a granny flat" is a special kind of nonsense with sauce for someone who has killed their father and mother ;-

It is also a WEG, however, our garden at the back has exclusive right of use by us. That wouldn’t bother us; we are practically secluded back there. From the front, we only get the driveway. The area between our house and the apartments is divided as a path.

I rather think you’ve already changed too much, and the "original" probably wasn’t a great piece of work either, but at least not such spicy rubbish.

We have already changed quite a bit as well; I don’t want to exclude that it wasn’t ideal, but that’s why I’m here now I’ll attach the originals showing how it was originally planned.

Leave the developer with his problem alone and keep looking for yourselves. Here, worthless living space would only be built for the sole purpose of extracting the maximum economic value from the plot. If I were the developer, I would tip my hat to the colleague for this feat – as a customer-oriented construction guide, I simply find this offer brazen.

What problems exactly do you mean? The layout? Path division? Extension? Do you think it’s hard to sell?

Of course, it was attempted to get the maximum out of the plot. It is 25 km from Ffm, 15 km from Darmstadt, absolutely a sought-after location, and in general, finding plots is almost impossible… and then you have to be able to afford it after knocking out 100 other applicants who offer a little more “convincing money.”

Brazen regarding price/performance?

May I ask how much the BT costs?

The question probably refers to the purchase price? 769k turnkey

Here for comparison is the original plan before we made changes. (Sorry for the blurry picture, child got hold of it)