It's always better with light.
No. I didn’t write that out of mere fun at a silly comment. But because it really is cheaper. You can produce artificial light in non-distorting color temperatures. But conversely, there is no sunlight without heat radiation, which unfortunately stirs up dust. With a window in the dressing room, you are practically nailed to closed wardrobes.
Well, the chimney was immediately noticeable too. [...] Is that really a no-go?
It hardly gets more of a no-go. Am I correct in assuming that he was the last one to notice this?*
*) purely rhetorical question
I think especially on the upper floor with stud walls, we can still optimize somewhat after the cost breakdown.
Regarding the wardrobe, it is not about a carpenter but about
... the banal fact that the room height at the front edge of the wardrobe is about one-eighty and decreasing, and except for Alberich in flat shoes, everyone can only view the wardrobe contents in a stooped posture, if I may comment here in the style of Professor Boerne. Aside from that, a wardrobe with doors would of course have the identical problem here as the dressing room door. It is becoming increasingly difficult for me to believe the satisfaction of his other customers. By the way, I miss a statement about which walls are seriously supposed to be built here (as eleven-and-a-half anyway only bearing in sand-lime stone), and yes, drywall partitions will be the rule in this attic floor—so why even as drawn?
@hanghaus in the end we almost exactly adopted your heights, right?
Correct would be to adopt the heights
from the surveyor (even if those of a fellow discussant may be identical).
