Floor plan design for KfW 40 single-family house in a developed residential area with fully finished basement

Do you have the surveyor’s plan? The approval planning must also represent height profiles.

Would you perhaps also answer the questions regarding the offers from the house construction companies?
Several people here have made the same observations and asked questions.
And no one here feels like discussing pipe dreams.
At least one can see that the basement is planned solidly, so independent of the house itself.

Regarding the draft itself:
Yes, it can probably be built.
I am missing some professional competence here: a second parking space. Are you supposed to swap the cars back and forth for your entire working life?
Even if the parking space rule is from 1970, I would still plan according to my needs when building the house, also considering that they can change over time. Children’s fleet, bicycles you can’t get to at all if one or two cars are parked in the driveway.
The exterior appearance with the different window sizes is confusing: 200 cm, 275 cm, 280 cm.
In the basement rooms you look against the nearby shaft, which doesn’t exactly get a feel-good rating. Calculations show that too little daylight can enter.

The technology has moved completely to the rear area, far from the access road, which is expensive and illogical.
Additionally, the path from the bathrooms is planned farthest from the technology again, so this affects the lifting system as well as hot water.
Then a technical room that supposedly has to serve for everything else, but of course has less storage space on the walls than functional rooms would have.

Then I find the row of rooms somewhat clumsy. I think an architect could do a bit more.

The hallway is nicely large and can be lit through the living room doors. However, you can see that although the room is large, it is only 3.60 m wide. The door area, which seems unnecessary, has the required width.

The cursed T is gone. Good. But 90 cm clear room width for the toilet, that will be difficult for childcare, illness, and cleaning.
A walk-in closet accessed from the bedroom can be disturbing for a partner who wants or needs to rest independently.

Does the offer from Keitel-Haus refer only to the ground floor + upper floor or also to the basement? How many € per sqm does the offer amount to?

We have reconsidered and revised something. Even though some here demonize the path or the work of the archithect, we have taken it nonetheless and would really appreciate constructive criticism or suggestions for improvement. The surveyor has also been here by now. The height difference is only just under 0.9m.

yes, we have - the archithect receives it and is supposed to then plan building approval and drainage based on it.

Does the offer from Keitel-Haus only refer to the ground floor + upper floor or also to the basement? How many € per sqm is the offer?

I only hear the name Keitel-Haus in connection with unadvised laypeople who like their offers.

At least you overlook/ignore my constructive criticism (probably because you consider it nitpicking). However, it has nothing to do with architectural criticism or the like when I consider your planner a textbook complete idiot. The fact is, he delivered something that a lawyer would call an "objectively poor performance." Even if the fee claim is significantly below the table, a proper service according to performance phases 1 to 3 must absolutely include the complete and fully completed provision of performance phase 1 before entering performance phase 2. This is obviously not the case here; the house concept has inevitably "taken a wrong turn" as a result, a height difference of 0.9 m (even if it relates to the building plot) speaks against a basement according to the rule of thumb (which you can find explained in my series of posts).

By accepting the planning services, which were created on a faulty basis and not properly provided, as a basis instead of rejecting them, the planner can consider his services implicitly accepted. You thus expose yourself to the risk of having to pay for them despite their objective defects. Instead of throwing this nonsense into the trash and starting anew at his expense, he can now also additionally charge you for reworking his botched plans. He has already caused you damage at least in the amount of avoidable construction costs, even if legally this is only “realized” when you actually build according to these plans. And that could well happen, because the nonsense is “approvable.” But for this result, you could have a student “draw” the house and have a “rubber stamp” present it.

Since you are a construction engineer, you should discuss with a lawyer whether consumer law “protects” you and whether you can still play the complaint card against the planner. Even if you feel good about healing the design with the help of the forum community: you are doing a great disservice at least to all other consumers of planning services by letting such bungling planners get away with their poor performance!

Formally writing the conceptually ignored terrain heights into the botched plan iterations and considering them in the drainage planning does not cure the incorrectly built planning for five cents.

If the heights from the surveyor are now available, then show them, so that can work with them.

Since the OP probably perceives me only as a complainer anyway, I can add this remark: I only hear the name Keitel-Haus in connection with unadvised laypeople who like their offers.