Floor plan discussion: Single-family house + guest apartment as a multi-generational house on the northern slope

There must surely be a plan of the property showing the elevations. Is there also a plan that shows the dimensions of the property? Is there a development plan that prescribes the heights of the house? Your basement can hardly be considered a cellar given the terrain!

Surely there is a plan of the property where the elevations are marked. Is there also a plan showing the dimensions of the property?

Is there a development plan prescribing the heights of the house?

Your basement floor can hardly be considered a cellar given the terrain!

If not explicitly mentioned, one must probably assume that the building authority will use the surrounding buildings as a reference. I'm not sure, but it is very likely (in case you didn't overlook it somewhere ;))

I also assume that the building authority is aware that there is a slope there. That is why, in addition to the two-storey allowance, a basement floor is permitted which is built into the slope. However, this basement floor may not be a full storey; otherwise, the development plan would show a 3 under VG (full storeys) and not mention a slope floor.
But your slope floor probably protrudes on average more than 140 cm above ground level?

... and here I completely disagree with you, because that would be a problem for you to plan with 3 full storeys.

Dream houses cannot be realistically and constructively discussed… otherwise, someone could advise you to add another 10% for bottlenecks ;) No, seriously, what is the point of a suggestion or criticism if you have to reduce the planned 270 sqm by 50-80 sqm anyway due to the budget, because you are over quota with the budget?!

In principle, I like the floor plans (open, of course, flexible) except for a few things… (setting aside that the hallway in the granny flat is too narrow for barrier-free design) and that the main apartment has no work space in the kitchen and nowhere to find storage space (unless you want to store your suitcases and garden cushions in the pantry)… but I’m of the opinion that a three-storey building is not permitted anyway.

The slope floor is designated as a slope floor in the development plan and not as a cellar. According to my understanding, it may also legally be considered a full storey.
On the one hand, the development plan includes elevation data. These correspond to my information from the previous post (and roughly to reality by eye). Additionally, the development plan specifies the raw floor height for the slope floor and a maximum wall height that allows 3 full storeys (9.3 m). The building authority must therefore be aware that the slope floor largely lies above ground. There is no obligation in the development plan to add fill or the like. The maximum height for fill is even limited to 2 m, meaning that not even the south side of the slope floor would be completely underground.
Also, the houses in the neighborhood with the same development plan have full storeys as their slope floor. In almost all houses, at least two sides of the slope floor are completely uncovered. Many are built, for example, with the ridge running north-south (with roughly the same aspect ratio as our plan), the south side (short side) is completely underground (driveway from the south), the north side (short side) is completely uncovered. The east and west sides (long sides) usually have one side fully uncovered and one side half uncovered (with a retaining wall or slope). Therefore, none of the houses would comply with the average 140 cm height rule.

I think this is similar to attic floors. They are often legally considered a full storey (at least beyond a certain roof pitch or with a larger dormer), but are not listed as an additional full storey in the development plan, but rather as an attic floor.

Regarding the floor plan discussion: Where would you put the storage areas? My only idea so far is to make the bedroom on the upper floor a bit smaller to accommodate a larger closet along the bedroom wall in the hallway.

Maybe I should also phrase the discussion question differently: Where and how could the area be reduced?

My problem is that with reduced space, the rooms are difficult to distribute over the floors:

The greatest saving potential is on the upper floor: no guest room, all rooms and hallway somewhat smaller -> that would save at least 15 sqm.

On the ground floor, in my opinion, only the office could be made smaller (which would then need to have room for 2 desks and sleeping space for 2 people) and the pantry/utility room could be reduced a bit -> max. 5 sqm smaller, more likely less.
Alternatively, the office could also be placed upstairs, making the ground floor significantly smaller, but the upper floor would then be too large again.

In the slope floor, the technical room could be made smaller. What would be the minimum size here?
In the granny flat, the office could be made a bit smaller. The hallway would rather need to be bigger (barrier-free) -> probably also less than 5 sqm saving potential.

Another idea would be an outside staircase instead of an inside staircase to access the ground floor. -> saving potential 4-5 sqm
The question here is whether that makes sense. On the one hand financially: Is an outside staircase (with an additional landing in front of the front door) more expensive or cheaper than an inside staircase?
On the other hand: Is an outside staircase practical? I am mainly thinking about snow and ice.

Do you have any other ideas or suggestions on where space could best be reduced?

I rather think that you need to reconsider whether the [Einliegerwohnung] has a quality of life that can compete with a condominium. I simply do not see how your demands can be reconciled with the budget. At the moment, all forecasts still assume long-term persistently high construction costs.
The [Einliegerwohnung] is not even small, but also has three rooms. I estimate that 2023 rather raises the question of what we can and want to do without in order to have the parents nearby.

As long as you stick to your granny flat with 50-60m², nothing can be done. Even if you reduce it to an unattractive 40m². You are planning too generously. For your budget, you can get at most 180m² all inclusive in KfW40+ standard on a slope. That means you have to cut at least 60m².

Or in other words, your budget is sufficient for about 200 sqm at the current construction costs, provided that the ground and slope pose no problems and you choose the cheaper options for the fittings. Friends of ours currently have planning underway in rural NRW and came up with 3100 €/sqm for the square meter after the sample selection. And by then, all dreams of elegant stairs and higher ceilings had already been scrapped. Now they are faced with the question of small but fine or spacious and DIY store chic.

Sorry, but these are your assumptions, some of them also incorrect. You infer too much without knowing.
For example:

Also, the houses in the neighborhood with the same development plan have full floors as the ground floor. In almost all houses, at least 2 sides of the ground floor are completely exposed. Many are built, for example, like this: ridge direction north-south (with approximately the same side ratio as our planning), the south side (short) is completely underground (access from the south), the north side (short) is completely free.

The average 140cm would therefore not be met by any of the houses.

Yes! That’s exactly how it works when two halves are 100% underground and two halves are 100% above ground at standard ceiling height. Of course, it also depends on the federal state, from which point it is measured, and how high the hillside floor actually is. But generally speaking, your neighbors have the typical basement with an average 140cm described, which according to your described data and general assumptions is not a full floor. That, however, is something different from letting more than 2/3 or 3/4 show out on average as in your case. You calculate that and obviously cannot see it.

The building authority must therefore be aware that the hillside floor is mostly above ground.

No. Otherwise, they would allow a 3-story building. A hillside floor will very likely be what is allowed to protrude by 140cm on average. I personally even doubt that living rooms are allowed at all in the hillside floor! But let’s not assume the worst now.

I think it’s like with attic floors. These are (at least from a certain roof pitch or with a larger dormer) often legally considered a full floor but are not labeled as another full floor in the development plan, rather as an attic floor.

No, that is calculated. It isn’t sometimes like this or like that. A full floor is subject to a fixed definition (depending on the state building code). Attic floors are not mentioned because only full floors are mentioned. Accordingly, you MUST build the roof in such a way that it does not become a full floor. Or the development plan states, for example, 2 stories plus attic floor. But even then, it cannot be a full floor in terms of calculation. And very likely it’s the same with the hillside: 2 stories plus one hillside floor, which, however, must not be a full floor.

The hillside floor is designated as hillside floor and not as basement in the development plan. According to my understanding, this may also be legally a full floor.

A basement may legally be a full floor. That is correct. However, legally, there is no hillside floor.

Additionally, the raw floor height for the hillside floor and a maximum wall height allowing 3 full floors (9.3m) are specified in the development plan.

A specified wall height of, for example, 9.30m does not mean the conclusion that 3 floors are allowed or that 9.30m of wall must be visible. You are allowed to build into the hill. You may also build a hillside floor. But it will, with all probability, not be allowed to be a full floor.

You interpret things as you want them to be.

Just post the development plan here.
Then have a look here:
https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/bebauungsplan-vom-architekt-nicht-eingehalten-konsequenz.33978/

And here, using the example of Pfaffenhofen, what they mean by indicating 2 stories plus hillside floor is nicely shown. There it is clearly visible what a hillside plot must or may do, namely only partially (half / 140cm on average) protrude.
[ATTACH alt="337DF587-2344-4D50-8F78-B8CD77E64666.jpeg" type="full"]76576[/ATTACH]

And very important: I would definitely call your authority at your place and ask what a hillside floor is or what they mean by what you are allowed to build.
Just a reminder again: I couldn’t care less, and I have no disadvantage whether you build or not. But personally, if I were you, it would be too risky to plan based on my vague understanding. Because everything indicates that you are working on false facts here, even if you are very stingy with the information here.