New single-family house approx. 150 m² with basement garage

The slope is overcome and not used.

*frame* !!!

The draft was created based on my initial specifications

The original poster is shocked, he has been left speechless and no longer shows up here. The problem here, I think, is that a layperson puts a lot of thought into a building, which, however, only allows limited possibilities. If one had immediately turned to an architect from the rather hilly area, more would have been planned in the direction of the shape of the property. Unfortunately, the general contractor was only used as a draftsman who slipped a basement under an existing single-family house to make it stand straight.

Now I am looking forward to your feedback.

We are also looking forward to yours!

Unfortunately, the general contractor was used only as a drafting slave who gave an existing single-family house a basement to make it stand straight.

Objection! – as I already hinted with the words

I have already seen noticeably lazier slope-adapted standard designs.

I do not see it that way (as a drawer design with a basement propped underneath with a garage door). But unfortunately planned against an unwelcome slope instead of accepting the gift of the topography. On the ground floor, I do not recognize a run-of-the-mill ground floor with merely an entrance relocated to the basement, as is often found in houses on slope plots that are not accepted. What makes this design seem sick to me is rather the delusion of the lazy egg of Columbus, trying to connect the two eaves sides with one open-plan space as a passage, just because one apparently considers it a logical consequence to "have to" connect here two opposite chocolate sides (namely a half substitute south side in the northeast and a half substitute south side in the southwest). This plot requires – which is by no means a bitter pill! – a free architect. The key issue here is not the non-slab-on-grade plot, but the (everyday-conditioned) narrow-minded perspective of the drafting slave.

Thank you very much for your honest and constructive feedback. To be honest, I was quite shocked at first, as I thought I was presenting a very suitable, albeit reasonable, stage of the draft.

Regarding the building design, I actually thought it integrated well into the hillside. Especially the perspective views immediately appealed to me. The terrace was intentionally placed on the rear side, as this is the only side that is not visible from the outside. To also benefit from the sun during the winter months, the balcony on the front side was added accordingly.

I also really liked the ground floor, especially the open living/dining area with kitchen, which I still find very coherent with its connection of the two eaves sides and matching my ideas. I also cannot quite understand the mentioned minimal size of the kitchen and dining area, as to where exactly it is too tight here. Perhaps you might have some suggestions on this.

At the upper floor, I am still a bit bothered by the layout of the bathroom, especially the shower, which disappears behind the door, is probably not ideal. Other than that, I am quite satisfied, and the dressing room (more like a walk-in closet) is, in my opinion, sufficiently large and should not be unnecessarily enlarged at the expense of another room.

For me, the question now arises how I should proceed accordingly. I am torn between continuing as is with the general contractor and the current design (of course costs have already been incurred here) or hiring an independent architect, who might be able to get much more out of it, which I currently simply do not see as I am so strongly focused on the current draft (which is largely based on my ideas).

How high do you estimate the additional costs + time required for architect planning for this construction project? Should I just let the architect start first or confront him with the existing ideas/designs?

All good because the house itself has quite good livability inside. If you now, in consultation with the architect from the BU, think about the site, how you want to use it, which views you want to have from the house, how you can use privacy and light in the garden (there is room for more than just one terrace), then you can either come to the conclusion that this is right for you or make adjustments or also find that the design is good but still not suitable. You now have a number of questions and can enter into dialogue again. The planning phase is important and it is good to take proper time for it.

Maybe you have a few hints on your side.

Certainly not from me - I would consider it illogical to make a detailed critique of a draft that in my opinion is based on misguided premises. I am happy to "wait" for an alternative.

whether I should continue with the general contractor and the current draft (of course, costs have already been incurred here) or still commission an independent architect,

The general contractor does not have to be bad as such, but as a planner he is apparently not suitable to bring out the talents of the property like a coach.

who might be able to get much more out of it, which I simply do not see at the moment, because I am so strongly focused on the current draft (which is largely based on my ideas). How high do you estimate the additional costs + time required for architectural planning for this construction project? Should I just let the architect do it first or confront him with the existing ideas/drafts?

If you feed the architect with the same suggestions, you limit his creativity and correspondingly risk that the result will not justify the extra time and money. Essentially, your post #16 reads like a confession that I hit the mark with my diagnosis – but that alone will not get you any further. Give a freelance architect nothing more than a vision of the future residents of the house. He can and must read the contour lines himself. Be open to something unexpected coming out of it.