House on the slope floor plan fine-tuning

If an architect without quotation marks came up with this, I suspect that the "modification" consists of cramming in small rooms (and the pursuit of a corner premium). The labyrinth can already be rented out as an escape room.

What is the worst construction site for you?

My deceased grandma (bakery saleswoman, 0 semesters of construction law) already doubts with the wrong glasses that the insertion requirement can be met with this foreign body.

Why should that not work? For a very similar house (same dimensions except for the additional bay window) and a small hipped roof instead of a flat roof, there is a building permit. However, flat roofs are also standing opposite.

I am also puzzled by the exterior appearance in connection with Paragraph 34. But you said there is a building permit for a (visually!?) very similar house?

Do you mean because of the 2 full stories? The previous architect also said it was probably a long back and forth until it was approved, but it did work (after about a year until the approval).

Do you mean because of the 2 full stories? The previous architect also said it was probably a long back and forth until it was approved, but it went through (after about a year until the approval).

Well, because your planned house simply looks completely different from the two next to it, if their representation is correct. Maybe you could give a bit more insight into the other buildings in the area.

1. A window is mandatory in a used room. 2. If you know that a terrace will be built there, you plan it differently.

You kindly leave the outer shell as it is? Then your view is wrong. The surrounding strips are not visible in any floor plan. The bay window (kitchen) is also not visible in the elevation.

You moved something around? Show the original. Preferably the first draft as well.

Then I can have a look at how your house fits in there. It certainly doesn’t fit into the surroundings.

The contract actually states that I am not allowed to publish or share the documents before completion... But maybe I can show a section so that you can see what I have changed. It was mainly about the children's room, which was only 2.59m wide in her version. That was because I said during planning that if possible, I wanted the option of a dumbwaiter. But if I get such a narrow room for that, I’m happy to do without it. I had also expressed the wish for a utility room accessible from the hallway. That’s nonsense too, as can be seen from the result.

I once read through the old post. A link right at the beginning would have helped.

https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/fertighausbau-mit-massivhaus-grundriss-sinnvoll.48133/

At this point, a one-piece canopy integrated with the house is simply important to us.

But you can't see that in the design (at least not in the form shown here): the illustrations show stacked flat-roof bungalows with "roof overhangs" on every floor slab. And besides, a "disintegration" into the property, which quite literally represents a topographical violation (penalty: excavator buckets weighed in gold).

What is the worst construction site for you?

The design (or maybe just what you "modified" from it?) appears to me as the sole accumulation of pain points.

But I have it easy, because in this case I have such a comprehensively unrealistic impression of the planning that I would even refuse a consulting mandate with an empty waiting room. Given such an impressive gap between living expectations and property reality, a change of property seems to me clearly the relatively cheapest solution.