modern Bauhaus, lots of glass, 170 sqm ground floor/upper floor, currently in phase 3

But your way of putting it...

sorry, but that was referring to this nonsense:

It couldn't get any worse. Why so aggressive? - considering the context, in my opinion, this already crosses the line from provocation to physical attack. And the overhang of the OG looks like the pathetic attempt of a tribute to the Cologne harbor.

yes, this happens often. Rick and I had that too and were able to bypass it. So you can continue to read nonsense and learn from it.

Well....I’d say this. Surely many laws and regulations are not always sensible and sometimes it can make sense to "bypass" something like that. But if it’s only about bypassing itself, it doesn’t make sense and just because I was able to bypass something, it can still look stupid, just like the non-bypassed version. Here in the forum I have seen only very few buildings that could claim to be considered architecturally particularly sophisticated projects. I wouldn’t even think of such an idea for my building, even if I of course like it myself. Whether a building elevates an entire region/section or not will certainly be rightly seen differently by everyone, but as the builder of a more or less plain standard single-family house, we shouldn’t overestimate our impact on society. Every mother finds her child the prettiest even if it has lots of pimples on its face. That’s fine, but you don’t have to register it for Miss Universe right away. There is simply a huge difference between a nice residential house and an architecturally sophisticated overall object that consciously follows a chosen style in SHAPE AND EQUIPMENT. You can’t just say...um Bauhaus or something similar...maybe like in Tyrol....as long as it’s different from the others. I would have liked to build a flat roof at first but that seemed difficult to implement in the municipality; so why should I forcibly do that if I’m NOT really following a recognizable style like Bauhaus (form, architecture, materials, etc.) or similar and instead am building a normal single-family house? I would wish the same strength of intended bypassing to the OP in the design of his interiors; these are rather dull (sorry) compared to the outer revolution. I have seen too many projects where the house and the surroundings rather resemble a display area at OBI but the builder thinks he has hit "Art Nivea" or whatever it’s called.

why do you imagine that such a modern building annoys the neighbors?

I am not imagining anything, but the OP apparently the opposite: that the neighbors ought to be grateful to him if he educated them about something more modern.

yes because I consider it completely unnecessary and pointless to point out every time that a modern house does not fit into a long-established residential area. It simply isn’t true!

Exactly, that’s what I’m saying. You have a modern house in a long-established residential area, and the OP wants to build an environment-dominating punk provocation. I am surprised that you see your houses as brothers in spirit.

yes because I consider it completely unnecessary and pointless to point out every time that a modern house does not fit into a long-established residential area. It's simply not true! That the floor plan is unusable for 5 people is another matter.

What is modern or who decides that? A "cube house" has been found in every brochure for years, just like the so-called city villas etc. With this, they want to convince a broad range of buyers to stand out from the rest because they have built a "Bauhaus" or a "villa," though with the small spaces of a typical single-family home. That's just silly advertising stuff, nothing else. Whoever builds a real villa today or a house in a consistent Bauhaus concept and outfits it accordingly as a whole can only grin about it; it's like with furniture, lamps, etc. Copies flood the market but they remain cheap copies. This is all old hat and at most still a trend... it's practically gladly accepted, as they say in the furniture store at the plaid sofa corner. Of course, another, foreign architectural style can also fit, but I still find the attitude of "bypassing" and "don't care" inappropriate because I think one should give more precise thought to this without torturing oneself.

I am not imagining anything, but the OP apparently the opposite: that the neighbors should be grateful to him if he enlightens them about something more modern.

If that is the attitude - better to leave it like that, good coexistence will not be achieved this way. That is why I recommend involving the neighborhood in the plans. Our house is also significantly different from all the others in the area. We discussed our plans early on and encountered no resistance, but rather concerns about whether we might be overestimating ourselves with the slope location. It is simply not good to live in a beautiful house in a poisoned neighborhood. Occupying a building gap with arrogance or inconsideration is therefore unpragmatic. If it suits the neighbors and the building authorities - great. If you poison the neighborhood - bad. If the building authorities do not want to approve it - and there would be enough reasons for that - bad.

I'm not imagining anything, but apparently the OP thinks the opposite: that the neighbors should be grateful to him if he teaches them about something more modern.

What is instructive about that? It is, as always, and so often a matter of taste, and it should be clear that it varies completely over the course of a few decades. This house (whatever you might call the style) definitely enhances the residential area. By the way, every new house does that. I just find it completely inappropriate of you to punch a newcomer, who is asking for improvement suggestions for their floor plan, in the face with comments like "it can't get any worse," "physical assault," or "pitiful attempt"... As if you were the benchmark of good taste and architecture :rolleyes: