General criticism of architecture, spatial layout, exterior appearance

Ui… hard to address everything here.

The problems with the property are known and yes, the building authority will surely still have its say. There are many "ifs and buts" that need to be clarified. It is difficult to say now and thus to make decisions. We also currently cannot find out the names of the neighbors (data protection) and have to wait until building applications are submitted here. Then we will receive, due to legitimate interest, the building applications of the neighboring properties and can talk to the builders about the filling.

Our construction manager is currently planning with a strip foundation. The basement was calculated several times and unfortunately is not financially feasible. We are always asked about it and yes, the temptation is there, but we still have to do the filling and the basement will only be slightly cheaper.

Obsolete would be, given the restricted list of questions to the forum here, also the question to the planner whether with a 1.3 m filling height - and thus above the legally tolerated 1.0 m - the distance areas to the boundary for the filling (including retaining walls) are not triggered in reverse according to § 6 para. 8, sentence 2 no. 2 Hessian Building Code.

But now it gets interesting... What do you mean by that? I can’t quite follow you :-(
1. What is the legally tolerated 1.0 m filling about?
2. How can I understand this: "the distance areas to the boundary for the filling (including retaining walls) are not triggered in reverse according to § 6 para. 8, sentence 2 no. 2 Hessian Building Code."

Info: The notary appointment is scheduled for tomorrow.

Our site manager is currently planning with a strip foundation. The basement was calculated several times and is unfortunately not financially feasible. We are always asked about it and yes, the temptation is there, but we still have to bring in fill, and the basement is only minimally cheaper.

Now I can't follow.

If the basement is cheaper, why are you then refraining from it?

Now I can't follow.

If the basement gets cheaper, why are you then backing away from it?

Poorly expressed... a basement always costs more. In our case, the costs are somewhat cheaper, but still higher than without a basement.

In #49 the questions of the OP are basically limited to two...

That means you think if he only wants to know 1) marketability and 2) appeal, he wouldn’t be interested in a more important answer anyway? - that wouldn’t exactly be off-topic, but I would be offended if I were the OP at that point.

I honestly can’t think of anything.

At least no answer to why a basement would be "comparatively" more expensive. Because it’s not really an alternative; it would merely save the fill under the house footprint, not under the much larger "rest."

You practically don’t have to fill in here only if you are allowed to place the carport directly by the street and then step down toward the house. In that case, however, only the neighbors have to fill, and the view becomes like in the basement - then it becomes irrelevant which way the sofa faces.

a basement always costs more. In our case the costs are somewhat cheaper,

Practically means: the basement only substitutes its own "refill volume" (above the original terrain).

But I understand correctly that the entire property is to be filled in, right?

But now it gets interesting... What do you mean by that? I can't quite follow you :-(
1. What about the legally tolerated 1.0m supervision?
2. How can I understand this: "not the clearance areas to the boundary for the embankment (including retaining walls) themselves, even in the reverse conclusion to § 6 para. 8, sentence 2 no. 2 of the Hessian Building Code caused."

The monster sentence probably means: if you want to embank the whole one-thirty and not just "triflingly" 1m high, then the embankment itself must observe a boundary distance like a building. Then I would see your carport fall.

But I understand correctly that the entire property is to be filled up, right?

That's how I think it should be – the drawing is supposed to be hard cash. That means the basement would then only "save" house ground area times embankment height in fill material.