Floor plan options single-family house 130-150 sqm, 1.5 stories, hillside location

Sorry that I’m only getting back to you now – due to your valuable objections, many things were reconsidered, viewed from different perspectives, and then there were moments of "ah, now I understand why you recommend it this way or that way" – thank you very much! Example: Since the number of rooms is largely fixed, I thought planning bigger or smaller (depending on the budget) were equivalent directions – objection, bigger is easier, I only understood when I realized that there are fixed sizes like stairs and doors that you don’t just want to simply scale down ;)

What have we adopted and learned?

- first plan smaller: What is our minimal solution that does not yet represent an unpleasant compromise?
- compare construction service descriptions more precisely: This at least slightly reduced the price differences between regional, likeable companies and large representative companies. There is still a small outlier from Poland with enormous price differences, but polystyrene on the exterior facade is also a different matter.
- clarifying trade by trade with the architect might not be so bad after all. But some sense of security is still missing (what if trade xy then becomes significantly more expensive, no one has time, etc.) – we might revisit this, but currently it's heading towards a middle ground: architect from the house builder who focuses only on building the house, and the other trades are then tendered accordingly – through the house builder or optionally through us.

Architect. A sales consultant tailored a model house very well to the slope, to our wishes. However, he said very clearly, if you want it this way go to an architect. If you don’t, we have to sneak in a basement. We didn’t want a basement, we wanted a living basement level.

May I ask what you mean by that? In our case, the basement is supposed to include living spaces too – we have a south-facing open wall – what is the difference between a living basement and a living basement level?

Since the number of rooms is largely fixed, I thought planning bigger or smaller (depending on the budget) were equivalent directions – @11ant's objection that bigger is easier, I only understood when I realized that there are fixed sizes like stairs and doors that you don't just want to scale down arbitrarily

That has little to do with elements that resist scaling down, that reduction operations are problematic. And regarding the number of rooms: "omitted" walls (e.g., not separating the bedroom closet as a "dressing room" behind a wall) save considerable (both sides' clearance) space.

a lot was rethought, [...] What have we adopted and learned?

After this preamble, I expected new plans attached :-(

planning smaller first: [...] compare construction service descriptions more precisely:

Or not "planning smaller" at all, but "looking for smaller models"; and you better actively "compare" the construction service descriptions rather than passively, i.e., work out one yourself together with your architect.

clarifying trade by trade with the architect may not be so bad after all. But there is still a certain lack of security feeling (what if trade xy then becomes significantly more expensive, nobody is available, etc.)

I don't understand that. A tender always contains individual lots, and with the architect’s construction management the scheduling is also done. It seems to me you are making things unnecessarily complicated (which applies to many simple things when laypersons handle them themselves).

currently it’s heading towards an interim solution: architect from the house builder, who focuses only on building the house, and the other trades then – through the house builder or alternatively us – are tendered accordingly.

So the shell construction general contractor is supposed to plan, apply for building permits, and execute only the shell, and then you want to play sorcerer’s apprentice? – mistakes there cost a fortune (do you really have that much left over for it?)! – by the way, I don't believe a shell construction general contractor would tender the finishing trades for you. Google (including the quotation marks) "Ein Hausbau-Fahrplan, auch für Sie: das Phasenmodell der HOAI!" and then get back to me without obligation. We'll manage to throw the child into the well :)

P.S.: I just see

while many prefabricated house providers require a bank guarantee, our preferred partner at a regional Volksbank wants the last 90% of the factory contract amount (after the work planning) to be transferred to a fiduciary collective account

How does a "prefabricated house provider" become a favorite on a 130 to 150 sqm slope? - I don't want to quote Wilhelm Busch now ...

After this preamble, I had expected new plans attached :-(

I intend to, just not ready yet! :)

Or not "smaller plans" at all, but "looking around for smaller models"; and one better "actively" rather than passively "compares" the construction service description, i.e. develops one together with their architect.

"Smaller models" now again sounds strongly like a volume house? Or is it about complete life designs (maybe a bunk bed in the children's room after all)? Well, the latter would perhaps give house construction quite a lot of priority..

I don't understand that. A tender always contains individual lots, and with the architect's construction management the construction scheduling is also done. It seems to me you are making it unnecessarily complicated (which applies to many simple things when laypeople handle it themselves).

Quite possible, but I think I explained it badly – of course the architect looks after the entire tender process from the shell builder, but of course he can only offer us a cost estimate per trade for that, no price guarantee. Sure, the shell builder then also has his partner companies – but of course we would have the freedom to also get bids from other companies.

So the shell construction general contractor is supposed to plan, apply for the building permit, and carry out only the shell construction, then you want to play apprentice sorcerer ? – the mistakes in doing so cost a fortune (do you really have that – reserved for that?) ! – by the way, I don’t believe a shell construction general contractor would tender the finishing trades for you.

As above: That is of course not what we want.

Just google (including the quotation marks) "Ein Hausbau-Fahrplan, auch für Sie: das Phasenmodell der HOAI!" and then get in touch with me noncommittally. We'll manage to throw the child into the well :)

Thanks, that looks like good reading!

P.S.: I just see How does a "prefabricated house provider" become the favorite for 130 to 150 sqm on a slope? – I don’t want to quote Wilhelm Busch now ...

Hmm, it's not quite the local carpentry, but feels just a step bigger – I would have called anyone with prefabrication of the walls in the hall a "prefabricated house provider" – which also justifies the corresponding payment security. And as I understood you, you were not per se opposed to that construction method..

Here is the current floor plan. Entrance as usual in the basement in the middle, south is at the bottom.

Guest WC now without shower, since we are planning a second one in the sauna room anyway, the ground floor office has been somewhat deprioritized in favor of more living space. Furnishing is of course only exemplary and incomplete.

"Smaller models" now again strongly sounds like a production house?

Yes, of course. A catalog house is definitely more recommendable than a drafting slave individual planning (it doesn’t help much if the builder has already done the creative part).

of course the architect from the shell builder takes care of the entire tendering process,

I already quoted Albert Borland this week: "I don’t believe that, Tim!" :)

Here is the current floor plan.

A piano, a piano! (would you perhaps like a zigzag wall with it?)
From a residential basement, I expected more than just accommodating the entrance, guest, and sauna there.