Plot on a slope: first floor plan idea & request for feedback

Even a cowtown is allowed an unusual house. Avant-garde is not only for metropolises.

But should it be a block like the one from the OP? Unusual can also be harmonious. I, for example, would quite like an attic, after all, you are allowed up to 10 m high. Then you have a nice view over the vineyard to the north and also towards the village.

No one is at least looking for the ticket booth at the Kaff. I'm not talking about that impractical block-type parking garage that is neither Bauhaus nor modern barn. I think that one is off the table.

200m2 for two people is okay.

30 sqm also. 1500 sqm also. It’s a matter of inclination and resources. It’s not okay only when it harms others. I wouldn’t generalize this direct connection.

I would like to subtly question whether one has to demonstrate what is taught at ETH Zurich as the latest fashion on Dorfstraße in Knieritz at the Knatter. Avant-garde "belongs" only conditionally in the province.

There is already a judgment in that. Basically, there is nothing against good architecture. No matter where.

But should it be a block like the OP’s? Unusual can also be harmonious.

Good architecture may also polarize and stimulate.

I find the design interesting from the exterior view and can easily imagine that the look also works in a conservatively built environment. Whether it is good architecture, I cannot say, because the fit with the residents, their life priorities, habits, and preferences cannot be compared with the information available. However, I fear that the engagement with the location and object is more intense than the engagement with the purpose and the actual task. But that is the demand of good architecture.

The risk that something architecturally at best mediocre results (unclear task) is given, and then it actually becomes only "different" and not "excellent." Good architecture does not have to stand out but can be very inconspicuous. Always a question of the goal and the task.

I find the design interesting from the outside and can well imagine that the look also works in a conservatively built environment. Whether it is good architecture, I cannot say, because the compatibility with the residents, their life priorities, habits, and inclinations cannot be assessed with the information available. However, I fear that the engagement with the location and the object is more intensive than the engagement with the purpose and the actual task. Good architecture, however, demands this.

Architecture should reflect on the outside what is inside. Both belong together and make, among other things, good architecture – the style ;) And often (actually a lie), so rarely, great living space is found in good architecture. But not every architecture is suitable as a living space. Most residential buildings nowadays can no longer be classified as architecture. Simply put, it is just functional building. That is okay. Others may live in a house and make it their own, even though it's avant-garde, so that it fits. Architecture goes beyond what one needs. So I do not think that (good) architecture has to fit the residents. Perhaps one can speak of being a “guest” when one is allowed to live, sleep in good architecture ;) With a 5-700 thousand limit for the desired 200 sqm, I also do not see architecture, but functional living. Nevertheless, whether provocatively or subserviently or symbiotically to the environment, the latter should always be included. So if one wants to build extravagantly differently, one should ensure that consideration has been given to the surroundings and expression.

A bit of "philosophy" :-):
What I find nice about the village right now is that it has pretty much everything. 300-year-old half-timbered houses, the occasional mansard roof, many bungalows from the '60s in one part, and also very modern houses (for example, a winemaker has a great "glass palace") – and not to forget the winemakers’ halls. Overall, it feels much more harmonious to me than almost any new development area with the typical model house collections. Of course, I’m aware that our budget doesn’t allow for grand architecture, but at least an "interesting" building should be possible. It definitely won’t be a "standard gable roof," nor will it be "city villa gable roof no. 5" – this is no judgment on those who build and like such things, but everyone just finds different things "beautiful" :) (for example, I also like brutalist architecture, which many find "terrible" – including my wife...)

What is common for the whole village: the lots are all quite "fully" built-up. Therefore, I don’t even feel bad about building fairly densely here. Nature begins right at the end of the street in the vineyard, and looking at the neighbor is also not unusual in the village area (and completely unthinkable differently in our condominium in the city). We deliberately (!) chose a small plot that can be fully built on. Of course, I understand that this isn’t “everyone’s thing.” And honestly: a 700m² plot also implies that you look at the neighbor – just with 4 meters more lawn ;-). And of course, one has to be realistic (at least we do): a plot well over 1500 m² is not available in our region, and if one ever is on the market, it often costs more than 1 million euros.

So, philosophy over:
I’ve also thought about a "real" upper floor with the highest possible knee wall, which would have the charm of enabling a view into the vineyard, possibly also with a small southeast terrace.

I would just take a look at Pinterest and decide whether Barn House (I would leave out the wood) or Bauhaus.

Do not consider the ground floor as an appendage / necessary evil and integrate it better.

With the budget, something beyond the city villa page 17 or parking garage is possible.

The proposed house in the vineyards has something.