Planned new single-family house - floor plan available

My warning that it might not be allowed to build this way has thus died - but not my note: if you take energy-efficient houses even remotely seriously, such an unfavorable envelope-to-volume ratio swings too strongly in the opposite direction.

I was not aware of the efficiency aspect and apparently neither was the builder. He did suggest a 40+ house to us but never mentioned any possible inefficiency of the planned project. Let alone anything about the envelope-to-volume ratio.

(and not to stack the upper floor in the proportions of a shipping container on top)

I personally like it... even very much. Especially with the wooden facade.

Did I actually overlook it, or has there been no response yet to my surprise about on the one hand "timber frame" but on the other hand solid construction "wall" opening dimensions?

Not overlooked. I would like to respond to that but unfortunately I don’t fully understand the question.

Google the term Staffelgeschoss. There are nice solutions that do not look like containers.

Especially children want to bathe if there is a tub in the house. But is it intended that the little ones have to constantly go up the stairs extra? Oh, I forgot "back then"

They should have healthy legs after all...

I see it the same way: More can be done for functionality, practicality, aesthetics, and energy efficiency.

If this continues, my next topic will be "looking for an architect"

Sorry, have we actually already seen the site plan with surroundings and dimensions????

Yes. Now...

Yes. Now...

Command retracted... in the meantime the layout is a bit different: 26 wide, 50 deep

I would like to respond to that, but unfortunately I don’t fully understand the question.

Well, what confuses me is: you write about timber frame construction, but the door and window dimensions in the drawing are typical for stone houses (octameter plus joint). That makes sense for stone houses; for timber frame houses it is firstly unnecessary and secondly they have a different construction grid. That’s why I am unsure what exactly you are building from.

I was not aware of the efficiency issue

But you should be, if that is your wish, and not just a flea whispered into your ear by the builder like “we are already building the 2030 standard for you today”.

and obviously the builder wasn’t either. He did suggest a 40+ house to us, but never reported anything about a possible inefficiency of the planned object. Let alone said anything about the envelope-to-volume ratio.

Sure. He doesn’t earn more money if you reach the “better” energy standard thoughtfully – but if you achieve it with technology and material use. Therefore, it is not his interest to advise you purposefully, but profit-oriented. But even nowadays with Pisa-style education you should at least have heard something rudimentarily about basics like how hedgehogs overwinter. Even I know that, although physics lessons did not take place forty years ago due to a lack of teachers.

Personally, I like it… even very much. Especially with the wooden façade.

I was talking about proportions – again here in the sense of “elongated cuboid loses more heat than compact cuboid”.

Yes. Now...

Uh, no. A picture without a legend does not say more than a thousand words after all.

Command retracted... meanwhile the layout is a little different: 26 wide, 50 deep

doesn't matter. Many other things would be interesting