Floor plan design of a 9x13m gable roof house with an attached 6x9m attic

Do you perhaps have a link to the mentioned posts or can you tell me where/how to find them?

I can’t provide external links here. If you include the quotation marks, search engines should quickly lead you to "Bauen jetzt."

I’m also not 100% sure if I understand what you meant.

The freedoms of the upper floor planning are related to its construction; see also: "Planänderung: Aus der Beton- soll eine Holzdecke werden."

Without having read the posts, I want to point out that – if on the ground floor windows are only available on one side (in an extension or as here in a long garage) and the southwest orientation of the house generally determines the location of the living/dining area – it is difficult to derive the ground floor layout from the upper floor (with windows possible on both long sides depending on knee wall height). [...] Maybe you can explain to me in more detail what exactly you mean here.

I address the issue of knee wall height/window division in "Wie der Kniestock die Fensterfrage im Dachgeschoss beeinflusst." And I do speak of "deriving," not "copying."

For the average family, the necessities first arise in the upper floor. There have to be 2 or 3 children’s rooms, a bathroom, a bedroom, attic hatch, possibly an office.
That’s why you plan that first. From that, much is already determined on the ground floor, because the utility room and guest WC ideally lie beneath the bathroom upstairs, for example.
It’s bad if you start downstairs and then have to squeeze upstairs or end up with huge ballrooms in the bathroom and bedroom.

You plan the more complex, subdivided floor first. Exactly: conversely, the walls extended upward get in the way above, or you have to squeeze between them once you add the walls needed upstairs.

It’s clear that upstairs there are constraints regarding room layout and location of sanitary fixtures concerning the sloping roof.

Quite the opposite; especially the downpipes are the spoiler downstairs if you don’t think sufficiently in parallel in both levels. Headroom for the various bathroom activities is often conjured by dormers ("Gauben").

I have great understanding that a building project must comply with Paragraph 34, but I have less understanding that there apparently are no clear and outwardly transparent criteria within which one can create a plan that then is valid. If in the same neighborhood freshly built houses stand that obviously do not "fit in" at all regarding the outside measurements, roof overhangs, or size of sealed surfaces and violate exactly the same parameters that were objected to in my project, one unfortunately gains the impression that often double standards are applied here.

What really seems to involve "double standards" are the abilities of architects and laypeople to recognize compliance with the same regulations in two seemingly very different buildings. I know these "unfair," "scandal," "foul," "manipulation" convictions from laypeople about cases where in their view blatant double standards are applied (which, after objective expert review, regularly have not the slightest shred of substance). It is for exactly such reasons that a qualification requirement exists for plan submission authorization. You should really leave such technical discussions to professionals.

It is important to me first to gain some certainty that the floor plans created with your/your help make sense. [...] It would therefore be great to have 3 questions answered:
Do the two ground floor layout proposals make sense regarding room sizes, room layouts, and hallway widths?
Which of the two ground floor layouts would you favor?
What potential advantages would you see if the house or garage could still be shifted longitudinally against each other by 1 to max 2 meters?

One answer from you to the question that is most pressing to me when reading your thread would suffice:
Why are you stubbornly turning your house planning into a managerial matter as a layperson?
(I see no super-special points in your floor plan studies that an architect would be too dumb to understand and consider). You don’t need to prepare yourself to have to explain the architect’s job to them (possibly even with an optimal set of floor plans).

Where I have to agree: nothing serious is being planned here that an architect couldn’t also plan and draft properly. The irony in this sentence is hardly detectable. The neighboring wall is standing, the probably (still not recognizable) building lines and building windows according to Par 34 and the building authority, directions are also fixed. Lots of storage space, a bunch of cars, some display cases, two fitness devices and the age of the builders are indicated. You can fit small furniture almost everywhere with intelligent planning.

However, the recognition of the core message is also undone again by embedding it in topics that have nothing to do here because they do not occur here, e.g. dormers, cross-gable houses, more complex upper floors, downpipes from some additional bathrooms that are not planned. You don’t need a basement that also has to house an office because three children’s rooms still need to be planned on the upper floor. You don’t have the problem of a children’s bathroom and a utility room on the upper floor, all on a generous 160 sqm. Your intention is simple, and I would just confront the planner of a general contractor with it,

Boundary planting

At least one is planned - you can tell from that that not everyone on the street can just look into the bathroom.

What exactly is the white box on the gable side in the middle of the ground floor?

Garage and shed on one side at the property boundary? Are 15 m allowed there? Often it is 15 m but a maximum of 9 m on one property side.

Gallery above the dining area ... you should always think about the dining table lighting there. Just hanging a lamp over the table becomes a bigger task.

Basement .. exactly, why should it be necessary again? How about a house connection room on the ground floor and part of the technology in the upper floor?

My idea was to go to some providers with a floor plan concept and the exterior dimensions (both "stone on stone" and timber panel or timber frame construction) and to obtain provider-specific adjusted offers there. I have already had discussions with 4 providers. It is quite possible that there are standard house types that can be suitably adapted.

That is also how I approach the decision-making. Four or five providers (two stone builders, two wood builders, possibly a third from one of the two groups) are a practical basis. I regularly request two variants: "1. the house from our preliminary draft," "2. a proven, most similar construction proposal from your catalog including details on how often it has been realized," and for both (provided the two building parts can be separated) I always ask to specify "house" and "garage" separately. A basement or slab-on-grade is, however, always an essential part of the offer.

I have already created an Excel-based catalog comparing the respective scope of services from about 10 manufacturers. I would also use this to select suitable providers from my perspective ("everything from one source" is mandatory) and to have the possibility to make the offers somewhat comparable.

Good heavens, no Excel sheets. The devil made those to create illusions of comparability where, unfortunately, none exists. You can leave such provider selections to professionals or invest about ten times the fee in learning costs, i.e., pay to gain the confidence to do it yourself.
Why exactly is "everything from one source is mandatory"? – I recommend always allowing a general contractor but only in tenders and not as a substitute for them.

Many manufacturers nowadays do offer house, basement, and garage from one source (but as you rightly say, often work together with Glatthaar), which means that ideally you only have a single contract partner.

More important than "one contract partner" at the interface "top edge of basement ceiling" is an opponent with liability if the basement ceiling/slab and the house do not fit together. The garage has significantly less critical connections to the house. I often recommend my namesake (no relation) here. He builds local, made-to-measure "prefabricated" garages from pumice boards, also adjacent to borders.

Regarding the garage, I actually envision a precast concrete garage, as it requires somewhat less space and should also be cheaper. However, I am also open to constructing the garage in timber construction if it does not take up too much width. A slightly narrower garage (e.g., 5.50 m) in favor of a somewhat wider house is also conceivable if this offers advantages regarding the potential use of a standard house.

Nonsense. For example, a garage wall is 15 cm thick in sand-lime brick, 17.5 cm plus plaster in porous brick, 8 cm in reinforced concrete. Timber panel construction is so disadvantageous for garages; I wasn’t waiting for that innovation. That is why most "prefabricated" house builders prefer to buy precast concrete garages. I think precast concrete garages as double garages are worthless because they cannot be manufactured as such: they are always two parts – either (with single doors) two single garages open on one side, or (with a double door) a front and a back half.

However, I am a bit skeptical after reviewing many catalogs and visiting prefabricated house exhibitions that I will find something suitable from the catalog with the desired room layout designed for 2 persons, the gable-side entrance, and the dimensions.

Where exactly do you see difficulties adapting a rectangular floor plan catalog house of 2E2K to 2E? – "Family" means two or more persons, with or without dog(s) and/or cat(s). My schoolmate "Klops" wanted as a special request a barn for a parrot on his house – in your house I see none of that: no organ loft, no bell tower, no pool with or without diving platform, no water slide, no large garage for working on the houseboat or Zeppelin – not even a piano like ... (A zigzag wall would not be a problem for any house builder/general contractor).

Garage and shed on one side at the property boundary? Are 15 m allowed there? Often it is 15 m but a maximum of 9 m on one property side. Gallery above the dining area ... you should always remember the dining table lighting. Just hanging a lamp over the table turns into a bigger task. Basement .. exactly, why is it necessary again? How about a utility room on the ground floor and part of the technology in the upper floor?

The guidelines for boundary construction are known to me and yes, the shed may remain despite the 9 m rule. That the position of the lamp(s) above the dining table must be planned is quite clear to me and the basement is also needed. Are there any other notes/comments and suggestions for improvement regarding the floor plans? Many thanks!

You know my suggestion. I am in favor of the straight hallway.

But open to the suggestion from .