Floor plan for a single-family house

The moon won't let me sleep....

Where do you see "Bauhaus" on a dwarf house with a flat-pitched shed roof (or even a crossbar made of two of those)?

"Crumpling the plans" is not really a constructive contribution, sorry. Unfortunately, the "skin" is relatively restrictive due to the existing setback areas; if we could do as we pleased, it wouldn't be a house with a gable roof. But it can't be helped. The roof pitch of 35° doesn't excite us either; the building authority would allow a flatter pitch, but then the 2m line would move further inward and we would lose even more space.
These are the bitter pills we have to swallow.

What we have here is the first draft created by a draftswoman based on the architect's sketches; I consider it normal that revisions are necessary here.

The spatial concept itself appeals to us quite well.

So we have to realize our spatial ideas within the given shell.

If you already advise me to crumple the plans, then constructive—and realizable—suggestions for a better design would be a great thing!

Just whining unfortunately doesn't help me... I will not crumple the plans but will try with my limited creativity to get the best out of the circumstances for us (and it is precisely at this point that I sought support here; unfortunately, I can't change the circumstances themselves).

Obviously, I have no chance of getting from you the solution in the form of the egg-laying wool-milk-sow idea.

Too bad! I would have been curious.

And, a definite "yes": in some cases, the advice to seek salvation in reengineering rather than Dr. Eisenbart's tinkering clearly helps.

I did not mean this economically for my energy spent on complaining, but for your energy toward finding solutions.

The length of your list of dissatisfactions is a clear indication for the advanced diagnostician that "medication won’t get us any further here, it has to be operated on." I know that patients prefer swallowing pills to swallowing toads. But the doctor can’t help with that.

If you see that the dog is shorter than the tail, you can of course say: "oh, you painted a nice picture there. Come on, add a speech bubble with 'Woof, woof!' on it." I didn’t know that you would have found that nicer.

That’s why I rather said: "this has probably become more of a martens. If it should be a dog, then better paint it again."

Crumpling up a plan may sound brutal. But if you are stuck in a dead end, turning around simply helps better than stepping harder on the gas or shifting to another gear (except for reverse gear, of course). Every chiropractic success begins with a cry of pain.

Your plans were so far advanced that – also obvious to laymen at the restless building mass – the squaring of the circle does not quite want to culminate in a stable state. A newly built house with more dents from birth than an old one with extensions is no good. The "cross" alone actually shows that somewhere something simply doesn’t want to be squeezed from across to lengthwise properly.

Therefore my advice is to "start over." For this, you best transform your list of flaws into a list of basics to be questioned. That means you question each one: "is this a specification that stands in the way of my goal?"

1) boring facade: can actually hardly go together with an unsettled building mass;

3) knee wall 1.07 m: how does that come about: measured to an effective 1.00 m after floor buildup or why? — higher would mean moving the house back from the boundary by half a cm for every cm?

4) kitchen wrongly drawn: must not happen to professionals, or conversation results were not listened to correctly;

5) I understand the bypassing of the existing garage with the basement excavation pit. What I am missing (or may have overlooked): what would be the optimal basement if the garage did not have to be considered?

9 and 10) clear communication defects between client and planner. Where the wall next to the stairs runs, the plot of land cannot be to blame. Someone did not listen there.

Requirements of the development plan cannot be changed in priority. But planner’s listening must be upgraded, and of all wishes you must see which ones can be stepped down. Of course, I would preferentially check those that cause obstacles. A closet however needs depth for hanging clothes. If nothing can be adjusted at the knee wall, the location must be checked. If you do this trapped in a "fixed" floor plan, you may not get anywhere. So: back to the beginning.

Higher knee wall is not possible because the existing building is not just the garage, but also a house, and that does not work with the setback areas. Therefore, a gable roof and a lower knee wall.

Last night I did not just complain here, but also looked for solutions:

These would be: after the staircase was moved about 40 cm to the west, we now have more space in the dining area, so we can reduce the "wart." So back to the purely rectangular building form but with shed dormers, and not just for the airspace above the dining area, but the dressing room will get this dormer again, allowing the doors to be shifted further to the left (west), making the dressing room optimally usable.

The basement was originally planned to be as large as the house. We do need a basement, but not that large, so we decided to reduce it. This preserves my mother's garage and saves us costs.

We have no development plan; it is really only the restrictions from the setback areas that limit us. If those did not exist, we could also build a flat-roof bungalow.

Check the location: no, the plot is family-owned, so we get it for free.
Find another plot: almost impossible here (there are hardly any building areas being designated anymore, and if so, unaffordable).
We are glad to have gotten a building plot for free. For that, we have to make concessions elsewhere.
And within these possibilities, we are simply trying to find the best for us.

I personally find corrections after the first planning draft rather normal than a sign to give up everything...

Check the location: no, the property is family-owned, so we get it for free.

That was not about the property. Rather, it referred to the location of the cabinet, which must be moved elsewhere if there is not enough depth where the height is sufficient. A dormer (here actually: a cross-gable) naturally cures this as well – almost like a partial knee wall.

I personally find corrections after the first planning draft rather normal than a sign to give up everything...

You may just have a different threshold than I do for when to switch from making corrections to starting over after how many points of criticism.

Now I am already a bit too tired for concrete suggestions for changes. So for now, just this much: I find the house quite successful, even very much so within these parameters. My suggestion to throw everything overboard was not related to disliking something essential. Rather, it merely referred to the length of your own list of dissatisfaction points.

I don’t find anything boring here, only that the clarity of the floor plan gets lost due to the requirement in the form of the gabled roof environment.

I am not happy with the bathroom at all – but as I said, it is too early for a counterproposal. I don’t understand the trend of equipping guest toilets with showers even when there are no guest rooms nearby.

What I find strange in the floor plan are the terrace doors: it looks as if one slides next to the terrace, and the other almost to where the first one opens (?) – in the elevation view, however, it looks quite "normal" ...

Also a night owl *g*

Shower in the guest bathroom: it might be that it is initially designed only as an option and a built-in wardrobe will be installed. The idea behind it is: if one actually becomes in need of care and unable to walk, the west side of the living room will be separated off, a door to the entrance area will be installed, and then there will be a care room on the ground floor, or in an emergency it would be possible to live on one level (therefore we will also discuss the door width to the guest bathroom again).

Besides, from time to time we also have guests whom we basically accommodate "on behalf of others" and I don’t necessarily want them in my bathroom (in which I sometimes walk around naked directly from the bedroom).
Therefore, we are currently still considering whether to have the shower on the ground floor installed right away (for the guest reason) or to keep it only as an option for the future (if the care case should occur or if we decide we want the shower for the guest reason after all).

I still need to take another look at the terrace doors.
I believe folding doors are currently planned to the east, sliding doors to the front.

We have the talk with the architect this afternoon, let’s see what comes out of it.