Hello, as promised, I’m getting back to you regarding your comments.
Since the topic of the granny flat caused the most discussion for some here, I would like to address it first. I had written that the granny flat was constructed in accordance with KfW compliance. The credit information sheet states: “Residential units are rooms intended for permanent residential use, located in a closed context within residential buildings, which enable running a household (own lockable access, rooms, utility connections for kitchen/kitchenette and bath/WC).” Nothing more, nothing less. I can’t find anything about DIN standards, minimum sizes, or rental obligations anywhere. It may be that some have mixed things up. For LaBo, the whole matter looks different again, for example, but we are not planning with that.
The next topic was the terrain issue: The house to the left (west) of us is built in orientation and location exactly as ours is planned, with the same terrain slope. From that perspective, I already have a good template and, after consultation with the relevant specialist companies, no concerns.
: No, those are not one-meter contour lines! From the very north to the very south in sequence: 310 HM, 309.5 HM, 309 HM, 309 HM, 308 HM, 308 HM, 307 HM. This means the entire house with terrace and garden is located in the area between 309.25 HM and 308 HM. As you can see, I don’t have to worry about the plot being flat *g* And then regarding your second misjudgment (I will call it “the Cinderella nanny tale” in reference to your explanation): No, the upper floor was not planned after the ground floor, but hand in hand: children’s room in the bright and scenic south, office for working during the day in the southeast, bedroom for morning sun in the east, bathroom with large fixed glazing in front of the bathtub in the north with a view of the free undeveloped wide field. The same applies to the landing with large fixed glazing in the stairwell; utility room in the west with optional access to the walkable carport. Where is the sin now?! I quote: “Dialogue can obviously not only mean applause.”
: The courtyard driveway has an 8-10% incline. Where do you see a problem with that?
For the budget, I had specified €500,000 for the pure house (with garage/carport). I also already have offers for the outdoor facilities and earthworks, which are within range (from the same provider as the neighboring house, who knows the local conditions). Therefore, there are no issues with the budget.
: Your plan is quite nice but does not work for several reasons: The west side is the only side with houses, so it is unsuitable for a terrace. To the north is free field, to the south/east, a free view into the expansive valley. The street in front (your planned driveway) is a dead-end, and we are the last house; after that, it continues as a field path. Accordingly, our house orientation has already been perfected (see above). Additionally, your planned driveway is, in my opinion, far too acute-angled; I would not want to always drive or maneuver the car there. As I said, well meant, but unfortunately not suitable for our plot. (We initially even played with that idea with our architect, but for the reasons mentioned, it was sensibly discarded.) Still, thanks!
Light yield in the upper floor hallway: Anyone who looks at the floor plan sees a large fixed glazing (150 x 236 cm) in the stairwell. According to the rule of thumb (window to living area ratio: 1 to 8), this is sufficient for a 27 m² room. The hallway is 8.3 m². : Should be enough, right? In addition, the utility room door is open most of the time (like almost every door on the upper floor), which lets in additional light from the floor-to-ceiling (!) window.
Wall thickness: What do you mean by that, ypg? Monolithic construction with T7 bricks for EH40 are in my case 42.5 cm exterior walls. Or do you mean the missing almost one centimeter of plaster?
All recesses are well thought-out built-in closets! Sorry, that was self-evident to me and therefore not worth mentioning.
: “For me, it looks more like an office/guest room is planned on the ground floor, through which one accesses the guest bathroom. And the office on the upper floor then becomes the dressing room.” I don’t understand that! The upper floor has its own dressing room in front of the office, so why should the office still be one? The office is actually supposed to be an office.
: The guest WC already has a shower, as shown in the plan.
We are actually leaving out the fireplace and only making provisions for an optional retrofit after the 10-year fixed interest period. Who knows what the political regulations will be in 10 years...
Sliding door (ypg): It is deliberately placed there because most of the way from the terrace goes directly into the kitchen (dishes, food, etc., to put away). We might still go a bit upwards so that we have about 1.50 m space to the island, which we consider sufficient.
Size of the children’s room (ypg): Matter of opinion, we find almost 13 m² sufficient; our children don’t need a ballroom.
Floor-to-ceiling windows in utility room/dressing room (ypg): due to better light yield (see above), nicer appearance, and actually optionally walkable carport from the utility room.
Office (ypg): is not supposed to be a guest room either and is also quite unsuitable for that location.
Timber stud walls are the load-bearing carpenter walls for the attic, and aluminum stud walls are the non-load-bearing drywall partitions (yes, they exist in aluminum too, just Google it).
I hope I haven’t forgotten anyone here, otherwise please excuse me. As you can see, the plan is already quite well thought out and tailored to our wishes and the local conditions. I have noted the tip to place the floor-to-ceiling window in the utility room on the left side of the plan analogously to the room door. Although I must say, the fine-tuning of windows and doors is not yet completed.
Thanks to you all for the tips!