Floor plan single-family house, 1.5 floors, 2 children's rooms, 2 offices - is area usage optimal?

Here it is just crying out for the development plan.

Maybe there are also height lines?

What do the BZH refer to?

Hello EFHäusle,

We recently completed an analog house, the upper floor is practically identical.
Regarding the bathroom on the upper floor: I would reconsider the arrangement of the toilet/shower/sink, there are smarter solutions for 10m2 of space. Just search the internet for floor plans and compare.
Regarding the ground floor: The wardrobe niche is basically good but in my opinion way too small. We are also four people and have a huge need for space for shoes, jackets, sports gear, gloves, scarves, hats, sports bags, etc. You won’t get far with 1 linear meter. We now have 3 linear meters floor-to-ceiling as built-in furniture and can say: sufficient space. Otherwise, everything is flying around in the hallway and that’s annoying and nobody wants to trudge down to the basement every time for a few shoes.
At first, we planned similarly to you, but then reduced the guest room on the ground floor in favor of a lot of wardrobe space and more space for living room/kitchen. We haven’t regretted it and are satisfied with it.

In general, I would agree with the previous speakers and design the whole house rather wider, otherwise the garden area to the south is unnecessarily small. So the long side of the house parallel to the street, either right up to the building window or in building alignment with your neighbor. But ultimately that is a matter of taste, you will certainly have a better feeling for the conditions on your property than we do from afar.

But don’t let yourself be unsettled, the optimal floor plan for you takes time. Look at many (sample) houses, then you get a feeling for room sizes and layouts. For kitchen planning, it is advantageous if it is done already in parallel with the floor plan planning, so everything can still be adjusted. The same applies to bathroom planning, i.e. how wide/deep the shower, washbasin + possibly cabinet underneath, bathtub should be, factoring in partition walls etc.

We created the house planning independent of the general contractor, meaning we commissioned a trustworthy planner/architect with the execution planning and then checked out the general contractors with the (almost) finished planning. This is no problem for standard houses with simple building structures and floor plans and the general contractors simply deduct the execution planning from the calculation (~7000 to 10000€). We also found the floor plan sketches from the general contractors to be carelessly scribbled. But you only notice that much later.....

Best regards

I

Yes, the BZH is given per plot. In this case at 663.25m above sea level (+/-0.25m)

This clearly calls for the development plan.
Perhaps there are also height/contour lines?

That’s how it is. And please no more piecemeal information.
Both details (that the height is given to quarter meters instead of the usual half meters, as well as the tolerance) strongly indicate a need for closer examination. They both suggest a (though possibly moderate but) dominant hillside location. Meaningful (= not overly zoomed in, but rather wide-ranging) excerpts from development plans should in such cases also include the significant information about which heights apply to the neighboring plots (both as "fact" and as "requirement"). This is especially relevant for the wall heights at the garage boundary.

We created the house planning independently of the general contractor, meaning we commissioned a trustworthy planner/architect with the execution planning and then went around to the general contractors with the (almost) finished planning.

Oh, why did you abandon the smart approach at this point and fall back to the suboptimal mainstream way?
Having an architect wisely involved through service phase 5 is good, but going up to 7 would have been better. Even when preferring a general contractor, it is advisable to conduct a professional tender. There is nothing against a general contractor as the tenderwinner, but a general contractor as the tenderalternative is a less wise popular practice.