Is a house building offer for a single-family house on a slope realistic?

So we would like to accommodate the children's rooms in the basement, but according to our structural engineer, it should be a raised basement.

Does this "living floor" in the basement then also count as a full storey?

We are only allowed to build 1 full storey, so a maximum of 1.5, right?

Does this "living floor" in the basement also count as a full storey?

Then have a look at your state building code. Usually, it says something like "on average 1.40 visible from the basement," then full storey. Of course, you have to be below that. And if it sticks out completely at the back, it won't be visible at the front.

Ok, that's exactly how it is stated for Lower Saxony. So the "Hochkeller" must not protrude more than 1.40 meters above the ground surface in order to be considered as VG.

Und wenn er hinten völlig rausschaut, wird er vorn nicht zu sehen sein.

That's how it will be for us. So there is no requirement that a maximum of 50% must be within the ground surface?

1.40 on average.

That's how it will be for us. So there is no requirement that a maximum of 50% must be located on the terrain surface?

I keep reading on the internet about around €2000 per sqm to be calculated for a new build of living space and about €700 per sqm for a good cellar equipment. If this should be wrong, then I understand your statement. I just thought that otherwise there would be some kind of mixed calculation between high cellar and good ground floor equipment.

I have referred your question to purely above-ground storage rooms; I would simply call this "high cellar" a "basement." And no, that’s not wrong: You can also freeze in living rooms (because you don’t provide heating), staple electrical cables onto unplastered shotcrete walls, etc.—the equipment, not the "location," is what determines the price for the enclosed space.

That’s how it will be with us. So there is no requirement that a maximum of 50% have to be on the ground surface?

Formally no, effectively this requirement is contained in a maximum of half a story height (generally one forty) above terrain.

If you want to have children living on this floor and store potatoes, the building effort in the corresponding mix will have to be driven: for the living cellar part just like fully above-ground living spaces (plus additional effort for groundwater and seepage water) and for storage rooms similar to garages.

I had also interpreted your question, because of the keyword "high cellar," as if it were about storage space in any case, and about exploring how this would be economically different in above-ground construction than in below-ground construction.

But if the cellar is needed anyway—secondly in terms of space because living rooms are supposed to go there, and first technically, because the property on the valley side simply does not reach up to the floor slab ;-) —then it is practically, as the Federal Chancellor would say, "without alternative" :-)

As I have already written in some threads about the cellar-or-not question: roughly speaking, from about 2m height difference in the building window, a replaced cellar (by L-block elevation or similar) will always be roughly estimated to cost the same as a built cellar (in usable equipment). In short: a cellar always costs the same whether you build it or not; and living space never becomes cheaper by lowering it.