Floor plan design of a single-family house with a 10% south slope. House entrance platform stairs

Your house is a 2-story building, which has the front door staggered between the levels. Completely insane effort, which does not benefit anyone here, nor is it sensible.
There was recently also a SplitLevel idea with a non-existent third level, not really a killer idea, but at least doable
https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/grundriss-zweifamilienhaus-nebeneinander-am-suedhang.49076/

Why should a front door in an intermediate level be a completely insane effort in this case at the height of the staircase landing? Whether I make the opening for the front door on the ground floor, upper floor or exactly in the intermediate level at the height of the landing is absolutely irrelevant in terms of implementation. I am using the landing for the entrance area. The only effort is a slightly longer landing.

The Split Level floor plans I looked at always lose an extreme amount of space below and above the Split Level intermediate level. The idea was to keep the intermediate level as small as possible in order to lose as little space as possible.

11*8m with 2 full floors. On 8m you only have a 0.8m slope. No real hillside house or SL makes sense here.

But if I set the house 5m from the property boundary and fill the area between the north-facing front entrance and the property boundary at ground level so that I can enter level, I end up on the terrace side (5+8=13m from the property boundary) with a height difference of 1.3m. Since I want to go out onto the terrace at ground level, this would be a lot to fill in, especially since the property slopes down to 2.5m at the boundary (total length 25m).

Actually, I don’t find the original idea all that bad. But the execution… reminds me of stories where people blindly followed the GPS (in this case the idea) and then ended up with their car in the sea or on a subway staircase.

At least one person who sees something positive in it, even if only a small thing ;)

I have tinkered with your 11x8m approach and have now at least come up with 11x9m where I have tried to implement your advice.

My second idea at the time regarding the approach with the entrance on the landing level would be the entrance on the upper floor, so that guests have to go one floor down into the living and dining area. However, the house would have to be set a little higher and more earth removed on the terrace side.
I have simply drawn a new design for this variant now. Maybe this time it’s somewhat better than a catastrophe ;)

A few words about my thoughts
The entrance is, as already mentioned above, on the upper floor. To the right of it is a niche and a wardrobe. A stroller etc. could be placed in the office. This is only a manageable period. The office is also a possible third children’s room.
The staircase leads directly down to the living area.
I am still at 17.7 sqm for the utility room; however, this was combined with the pantry with a door to the kitchen and the storage room.
We want to keep the possibility to spatially separate the living (couch/TV area) and kitchen, so I have planned a sliding door for each. I think the corner variant of the dining area is definitely much more open this time than in the first version. Also, a light-flooded area through the staircase + loft door to the dining area with a view of the garden.

As always, I look forward to your feedback

So you want to come into the house on the private level and open the mail there, let guests in, etc.? The place where you might run naked from the shower to the bedroom? Where clothes, toys, etc. often lie around? And you jump over the stairs to get to the office? A matter of taste, but think about it...

Without the walls it would seem spacious, with the walls and sliding doors between the kitchen, dining, and living room everything feels very cramped and in my opinion it won’t work well either. Where does the TV go? Where do cabinets for books, dishes, glasses, etc. go? There is hardly any space.

If you have the shower next to the entrance in the form of the main bathroom, you don’t need another one in the living area. I still find the HAR ridiculously large. My neighbors have 10m² and that is already quite a lot. I have 6m², which is actually a bit small, but it works. What is supposed to go in there? Bikes? Garden tools?

It seems to me like the plan of a bunker, where for security reasons no room may be larger than 20m² and must be separable.

Your walk-in closet in the bedroom is too small, there is no room for 60 cm cabinets properly or just barely 2m, because of the door. That is very, very little. The small children’s room is also awkwardly shaped because of the entrance hallway, those 2m² are purely useless walking space. And with the beds, I hope that’s a joke? In the bedroom you’re left with barely 50 cm next to the bed?

I don’t think the bathroom is bad at all.

Why should a front door in an intermediate level in this case at the height of the stair landing be a completely crazy effort? Whether I make the opening for the front door on the ground floor, upper floor, or exactly at the intermediate level at the height of the landing should be absolutely irrelevant in terms of implementation. I am using the landing for the entrance area. The only effort is a slightly longer landing.
The split-level floor plans I have looked at always lose an extreme amount of space below and above the split-level intermediate level.

I do not share the criticism of this idea. However, it leads to nothing to try to compare this special variant with "real split-level" building proposals.

I tinkered with your approach of 11x8m and have now at least reached 11x9m in which I tried to implement your advice.

In your drawings you should also be able to clearly see for yourself why I recommend developing the floor plans "top down." Starting with a frame of "X by Y meters" leads to nothing good (namely regularly to unsatisfactory results and the false consequence that it would probably have to be bigger after all). Why do you want to impress yourself precisely with this as a lay planner’s apprentice hoping for beginner’s luck – are you (seriously?) dreaming of saving the fee of a trained architect with a community-polished self-design (and possibly even that this would pay for the increased house size)?
Where are your inhibitions to simply follow the advice for a conceptual approach? – sometimes I think I am writing against a wall; also and not least with the advice for a normal family to look at standard building proposals.

Actually, I don’t quite understand why you keep trying over and over again....... Your needs are rather within the standard range, so why not at least take one of the [trillions] of floor plans available online as a basis and then adjust the desired details?

so why not at least take one of the trillions of floor plans on the net as a basis and then adjust the desired details?

That was even done ...

Planner of a construction company: ideas of a construction company but do it yourself

... and then, at my suggestion ...

Their version before the do-it-yourselfing would be interesting.

... to come out with the original (and a description of the changes and their motives), there has still been no response.

[...]

In advance: I am down with a fever and absolutely not of sound mind, which I will now prove!

I have been thinking about the new plan and then it occurred to me that if I were to pursue the idea, I would do so consistently until the end. For me (assuming: inclination to the south = view to the south, which also looks nice) that would mean I would consider swapping the levels and setting the house slightly lower (to allow for a west terrace). This would have several advantages:
- at the entrance, you are not in the private area, but in the public area.
- from the dining area, you have a much better view.
- in summer, in terms of thermal protection, bedrooms downstairs are also more pleasant.
- the terrace could then be designed as a west terrace, on the same elevation line as the house. Evening sun is nice anyway.

There would also be a few disadvantages. The south terrace would not be feasible that way. West-facing windows would then be more difficult downstairs, since only strip windows would be possible there (when rearranging the rooms downstairs this must be taken into account! Utility room/bath/office therefore on the west side). Since the layout is rather unusual, I do not know how others will react to it.

So. And now let Papierturm’s silly ideas aside and get to the actual floor plan. I like it better already. I still see two big problems:
1. I do not believe that the living room area really works. If this were my planned house, I would actually reconstruct it on the parking lot or something with ropes and placeholders (e.g. boxes) and think about how to furnish and use it sensibly. No matter how much mental Tetris I play, I can’t find a good solution.
2. The utility room is still extremely large. Here I suspect something: the idea to use the utility room also as a cellar replacement. The motto being there is storage space, you can put something there, pantry now also included.
But: modern utility rooms are often only partially suitable for this. With the corresponding technology in the utility room, it can get quite cozy and warm in there depending on the setup. Unfavorable for storing certain things (e.g. drinks, potatoes, etc.). Also again the observation that the utility room (a functional room) is larger than the living room (a recreational room).
Also, there is a lot of "dead" space in the middle of the utility room. I could say harshly: What the utility room has too much of, the living room has too little.

Personally: There must be reasons why the separation with sliding doors between kitchen / dining area / living area is desired. Without knowing these reasons, it is hard for me to assess its everyday suitability or unsuitability.

Whether the office is easy to reach with the planned staircase, I do not know either.