Floor plan revision, tips and experiences for improvement?

We only want to see an external view of this idea to find out if we would like it.

Those planning their own homes would do well not to want to view visualizations of their projects photorealistically colorful and flashy as if turning around in all directions in a new dress in front of a mirror, but to focus on the essentials: "where does which plane cut the original terrain and how are the proportions of the main building cleverly shaped?" The best way to do this is with the wireframe model – whether the bricks are yellow and the windows purple is just "opium for the people."

The idea of positioning the house with the ridge perpendicular to the slope makes absolutely no sense to me. I don't want to say that it's not an option, but the standard planning on a slope is definitely to align the ridge parallel to the contour lines. This not only makes the earthworks for the house significantly cheaper. You also get a large wall surface inside the house that practically begs to be emphasized with generous glazing. Another important point is, in my opinion, the garden as well. I see it in my brother-in-law's place here, who has a fairly large but long, narrow garden with a steep slope behind his house. He has spent his summers creating two terraces, each two meters height difference, thus dividing his garden into three sections. This means a lot of effort and/or very high costs. Whether in the end it is fulfilling to find steps at every corner in the garden is something one has to decide for oneself. It wouldn’t be for me.

Here is a bit more. As said, the original terrain will only be adjusted at the end.



Draft of the basement

I absolutely do not understand the idea of positioning the house with the ridge perpendicular to the slope.

As I said, it makes relatively sense to me – precisely under the condition that it makes sense in the specific individual case (to bring a terrace exit – which does not necessarily have to be located on a gable side – to an ideal height in the original terrain).

Here is something a bit further. As said, original terrain will only be adjusted at the end.

With regard to the visualization, clearly – for the planning it must of course be the other way around: the house is ideally cut into the original terrain, because that is the number 1 key to cost control on the slope (thus taking the top position that would correspond to the living area on a flat ground slab property).

I have already looked at it closely. The terrain only needs to be adjusted in front of the house. Otherwise, it can also be done with little effort in the north. Let's wait for the geological survey. I heard something about granite.


Here is the visualization of my proposal.

Would you rather place the house so that the lower floor is completely buried at the back and we would have to rearrange our floor plan, but you can access the north terrace from the upper floor, or set the house a bit higher to get more light for the rooms at the back, have fewer problems with a granny flat, and access the north side garden from the roof terrace via the stairs?