Floor plan design: Single-family house with basement; 560 sqm plot

after a longer period of consideration and research, we are back with the following changes:

[*
Budget increased by approximately 35% [*]Adjusted space requirements: [LIST=1] [*]Basement: workshop, storage, utility room, technical room [*]Ground floor: guest room/office, bathroom, pantry, kitchen, dining and living room [*]Upper floor: Child1, Child2, parents, bathroom
[*]Garage cellar removed

Our architect has created the following preliminary drafts for us. These serve as the first orientation (the upper floor has, for example, two variants due to different technical shafts).

In other words: maximally changed fundamentals ever; where are the corresponding two ground floors? As always, I point to my contribution "The Upper Floor Takes Priority" as a silver planning rule. Over THIRTY-FIVE percent budget increase with simultaneous removal of significant waste points results in a net increase of presumably around FIFTY-FIVE percent. This can no longer be a sole reaction to price increases, but strongly smells of roughly nonchalant previous planning!

What kind of roof is supposed to go on now? I don't see a staggered shed roof, but rather a conventional captain's house?

For the drawn chimney position: gable roof with ridge centered to the facade - upper floor as a full storey with filigree ceiling.

In other words: maximally changed basics ever; where are the two corresponding ground floors? As always, I refer to my post "The upper floor takes precedence" as a silver planning rule.

Over thirty-FIVE percent budget increase while simultaneously cutting significant waste points results in an adjusted increase of presumably around fifty-FIVE percent. This can no longer be a sole reaction to price increases, but strongly smells of grossly nonchalant previous planning!

Ground floor (image 1) and upper floor (image 3) fit. For the shown upper floor (image 4), only the arrangement of the technical shaft in the pantry on the ground floor changes - seems to have been lost during the upload.

Regarding the budget increase: It can indeed be misread. Here the subjunctive was meant, i.e. possible increase.

So you want photovoltaics on the east and west? So north and south would be the gable side? I don’t like the whole house orientation on the plot. It’s not even about north and south, but rather that the garden can only be accessed practically from the chill area and office/guest room. If a hedge is added at the top of the plan, then there will only be a 2-meter strip left. The property boundary is way too close to the open-plan living area. Where is the kitchen door supposed to lead? To the trash bin? For the main terrace, that space is too small, the sliding element is in the chill area. That means: the kitchen is the farthest away, even though it practically needs a terrace connection more than other rooms. So when guests come, you can’t even park the kids in front of the TV while you set the table, etc. For me, this is completely planned against the natural flow of daily life.. and it’s clear why: because of the unnecessary „Dreck-/Speisschleuse“, which has to do everything but doesn’t allow a sensible layout. The house plan here is dominated by the least important 4.71 sqm. I would set the priorities differently when building the house. Chimney: I don’t understand why it’s supposed to have a wrong position now.

For the indicated chimney position: gable roof with ridge centered on the facade - upper floor as a full storey with a precast concrete slab.

Is the ridge direction a preference or a zoning plan requirement?
What advantage is the concrete slab supposed to have here? - where my aforementioned planning methodology contribution is located, you will also find "Plan change: from concrete slab to timber slab" and the sister contribution "Lightweight walls in solid houses".

For the depicted upper floor (image 4), only the arrangement of the technical shaft in the pantry on the ground floor changes - seems to have been lost during upload.

Then upload the lost attachment as well. What does the technical shaft planner do professionally (they look so clueless)?

What do you think about a synopsis of the designs old/new inserted into the plot (preferably the roof view)?
: the OP is already grown up, let him do the homework himself!

Has the ceiling height already been mentioned? 19 steps are rather a lot. Where exactly do you want to climb there? Overall, I find the design somehow sad in relation to the budget. This is a standard that was inflated but does not fit your property at all. The first one was already modest. Who is your planner?

So you want photovoltaic panels on the east and west? North and south, meaning the gable side?

I don’t like the entire house orientation on the plot. It’s not even about north and south, but that the garden can basically only be accessed from the chill area and office/guest room.

If there’s still a hedge at the top of the plan, then you only have a 2-meter strip left. The property boundary is way too close to the living area.

Where is the kitchen door supposed to lead? To the garbage bin? For the main terrace, this is too small, the sliding element is in the chill area. That means: the kitchen is the farthest away, although it basically needs a terrace connection more than other rooms. So if visitors come, you can’t even park the kids in front of the TV while setting the table, etc. To me, this is completely planned against the daily routine... and it’s also clear why: because of the unnecessary "dirt/food sluice" that has to do everything but doesn’t allow a sensible layout. The house plan is dominated here by the least important 4.71sqm.

I would set the priorities differently when building a house. Chimney: I don’t understand why it should have a wrong position now.

Thanks for your feedback! The ridge has been rotated by 90°. That’s what we took away from #13 and #17 and passed on.

The conclusion is therefore: the floor plan is not really suitable for the plot. This now raises the question of how to proceed. Should the floor plan from #12 be completely revised again (if that’s even possible), or actually start over from scratch? If starting over, what would be your recommended approach. prioritizes the upper floor, but before the upper floor you need the approximate shape and orientation of the house on the plot, right?

Is the ridge direction a preference or a zoning plan requirement?

What advantage should the concrete ceiling have here? — where my above-mentioned contribution on planning methods is, you’ll also find "Plan change: the concrete ceiling should become a wooden ceiling" and the sister article "Lightweight walls in solid houses".



Then please upload the missing attachment still. What does the technical shaft planner do for a living (they look so clueless)?



What do you think about a synoptic comparison of the old/new designs inserted into the plot (preferably the roof view)?

: the OP is grown up, let him do the homework himself!

Ridge direction was requested, based on #17. The architect apparently oriented the house along the upper property boundary and thus rotated it a bit further east than in #17.

Regarding the element ceiling: I see the advantage of using concrete core activation (especially in combination with photovoltaics), vapor barrier is unnecessary (prone to errors), slightly reduced cracking, easier insulation (to the detriment of the attic).

Regarding the technical shaft: what exactly is clueless here?

Regarding the overview: before generating unnecessary work: are we talking about a comparison of #17 vs. #29 or #29 vs. #1?

Has the ceiling height already been mentioned? 19 steps are rather a lot. Where do you want to climb there?

Overall I find the design somehow sad in relation to the budget. This is a standard that has been inflated but does not fit your plot at all. The first one was already modest. Who is your planner?

Clear raw construction room height 3m. Floor structure 21cm; 22cm ceiling drop in the hallway due to controlled residential ventilation. Design comes from an independent architect. It seems to me that we urgently need your help here... Perhaps it could be an option to jointly develop a rough draft that we can present to the architect as a "reference"?