Prefabricated wooden house provider for single-family homes in Lower Saxony

If you have a house design, you can inquire about it both as a solid construction and as a prefabricated building. There will be some modifications later, but every construction company does that. Both can be energy efficient.

The best basis for the orientation inquiry is the preliminary design (as you would also use it for the preliminary building inquiry), thus an omnipotent mature stage of the design planning. EH55/building energy law can be produced at roughly the same price with the same equipment; only from EH40 on do the timber frame builders mainly have the upper hand due to the more cost-effective "upgradeability" in WDIS wall constructions, and here projections/cantilevers & co. are also more favorably insulatable.

I am just trying to understand this: That means the design planning/phase 3 would basically have to be tailored to either timber or masonry construction ("key decision")

From the perspective of the orientation inquiry,
you prepare this with the preliminary design, i.e., the result of phase 2 (embryo); the result of phase 3 (design, fetus) is already unnecessarily mature for both purposes. If at the time of conducting the inquiry round the planning has already been advanced to phase 3, this is not harmful but unnecessary. You can certainly also use the design for both purposes.
From the perspective of key decision making,
it makes the most sense for most to incorporate the results of the inquiry round into deciding whether to let the preliminary design mature into a timber or masonry design. In the drawings for the building application (phase 4) the walls are often still seemingly homogeneous/monolithic as black boxes which apparently only differ in their total wall thickness. This often leads to the misunderstanding that converting to the other construction method is marginal since you can also build a timber wall in a total thickness of caliber 365 or 425 mm. In reality, however, the design is no longer omnipotent like a stem cell but the designer should have already dealt with and decided on whether the house is to be born as timber or masonry for reasons of construction differences. Only arrogantly academic architects ignore this and leave such "trivial details" to the "working level" (= the draftsmen).

And it is basically nonsense if I inquire about masonry houses with my timber design because I either get no offers or not comparable ones? I had assumed that except for the tendentially thicker outer shell in masonry houses, roughly similar offers would come out.

Inquiring with a design instead of a preliminary design is not critical insofar as the recipients of the inquiry can be asked to interpret the design as a preliminary design, i.e., to translate it into their respective construction system. If construction details that are easier to implement with the respective "other" building method have already been included in the design, this can lead to cost-driving detours in realizing the implementation. The "gender adjustment" of a masonry design for a timber realization is somewhat less laborious than vice versa. And only in the case of "timber to masonry" does your assumption hold true, where the exterior shell would tend to be thicker. The most unadulterated results will come out if the basis of the inquiry contains no preliminary fixed decisions, which from the perspective of one or the other half of the participants could lie closer to the "other" construction method.
From the perspective of the designer,
the results of the orientation inquiry should be given the opportunity to give a hint for the course to be set, in which construction method the realization will succeed most cost-effectively.

However, it would be exaggerated to expect the key decision to necessarily act as a "gamechanger"!
In the concrete case, the desire for a (especially full) clinker facade is a strong indication to bet with a higher chance of success on a masonry winner.

In the end, despite my initially expressed preference for renewable raw materials, I am not dogmatic or, as our former finance minister would say, "technology-open" and could live without specific masonry vs. timber offers.

Not involving one of the "two factions" in the inquiry would, of course, have the consequence of foregoing the dimension of the key decision impulse and possibly excluding the more favorable alternative in the specific individual case from the outset.

It was already noted elsewhere that timber houses and full clinker facades might not necessarily be natural partners. The disadvantage remaining for masonry houses is the impossible QNG funding. [-] Yes, I took from that: "no clinker slips with ETICS" and "don’t interfere with the builder’s choice of materials".

Since slips are not built up but applied flat, in a ETICS its insulation layer would then also carry this wall cladding. There are composite products for energetic renovations which, in my opinion, especially in a new construction project, would not be the real deal, yes. You can also let a timber wall be clad with full clinker as well as a masonry one. It is rather the desire for QNG that conflicts with full-surface clinker cladding. However, you are mistaken that a masonry house would exclude BEG/KFN/QNG.

Very unfortunate, then I guess we will have to take the bull by the horns ourselves.

The only ones who are surely lost are those who dawdle with the preliminary discussion. As an inexperienced torero, you will never ever get ahead of the experienced, even if you proceed in the dumbest way (betting that with a large number of queried parties, the fastest responders would be among them). Get in touch, emails can also be "posted" on Saturdays. There are still preliminary discussion appointments available for next week.

I calculate €2000 for a basement within the thermal envelope, but with lower quality equipment than comfortable living space.
Lower Saxony is still quite inexpensive building land - sometimes €2800/sqm living space is enough.

That would mean €60,000 more for the basement in our case, i.e. I could stay within the budget up to €3,250/sqm for the living space.

but with lower quality equipment than comfortable living space.

I roughly calculated that depending on the family member, we will spend no more than 10-15% of our waking time underground. Therefore, I am quite willing to make compromises in terms of staying quality.

You haven’t mentioned anything about yourself or the residents of the house. So it’s hardly possible to give any advice.
For example, with children I would not build a hip roof because there is no storage or reserve space. But I am not a fan of basements either, if it can be avoided. I would rather plan the reserve space in the attic. Sometimes the development plan doesn’t allow that.
With three or more children, a basement makes sense, provided you can afford reserve spaces for hobbies and the like.
650 sqm allows for quite a lot. I can say that, we have built these 650 sqm with over 100 sqm floor area and a large front yard. There’s still enough garden left.

There are four of us (children 7 and 9) and we regularly have overnight guests from the family. Our design currently foresees a hip roof. The roof pitch is 30°. There is still some storage space available, but it is poorly accessible. Our floor area is also around 100 sqm (12.30x9.20 floor area including bay window) and with terrace, 9x3.5m carport and driveway, we are definitely making full use of the buildable area. The basement is intended to be 50:50 sports/hobby room and storage/laundry/technical room. What I especially like about the basement is that no space for the technical room is lost on the ground floor. We wanted a study or guest room on the ground floor. That would not have been possible or only with compromises in the living room.

If you have a house design, you can ask for it in both solid construction and prefabricated construction. There will be some modifications later, but every construction company does that. Both are energy efficient.

All right. Thanks!

In which district is the construction planned?

We are in the district of Lüneburg

There are four of us (children aged 7 and 9) and we regularly have overnight guests from the family. Our design currently includes a hip roof. The roof pitch is 30°. There is some storage space left there, but it's hard to reach. Our floor area is also about 100 sqm (12.30x9.20 floor area including bay window) and the building area is quite fully utilized with the terrace, 9x3.5m carport, and driveway. The basement is intended to be 50:50 as a sports/hobby room and storage/laundry/technical room. What I especially like about the basement is that no space is lost for the technical room on the ground floor. We wanted an office or guest room on the ground floor. That would not have been possible there or only with compromises in the living room.

Ouch. To me, that reads like "a layperson first loads themselves up with misconceptions before going to the architect and then presenting their results there as part of the design specifications." Guests from the family, but still sleep on a different floor – this triggers the nonsense about an aging bedroom in my mental cinema. The plot is flat enough for a vote against the basement, the attic (where you can also put a utility room) is big enough to make a basement completely obsolete; but attic "hard to reach" (probably means attic hatch, because staircase – despite the "bay window" – is awkwardly positioned). The house design is already a very concrete idea, but not discussed here, so the chance to incorporate improvement potential from the community was missed. How well must one have inherited to be so generously unconcerned about one’s money?

I wouldn’t build a hip roof with kids, for example, because you don’t have storage or reserve space. But I’m also not a fan of basements if they can be avoided. I’d rather plan the reserve space in the attic. Sometimes the development plan doesn’t allow that, though.

With a 30° roof pitch (and I haven’t yet ruled out a gable roof) the plan offers fully usable attic space, and I would especially not want to give up the gables including the option for windows. Does the hip possibly even prevent the staircase from being extended all the way up? – with a jerkinhead roof you could have the advantages of both roof types, and regionally it fits very well around Lüneburg. By the way, "following" me here brings exactly 0 points on the waiting list (and it’s no different with the colleagues). But I won’t say that again. If I don’t hear from you by Tuesday before the start of the Rosenheim-Cops, I’ll close the calendar for the week.

That a stone house excludes BEG/KFN/QNG, you are mistaken, however.

With certain providers at least stone houses with prefabricated cellar. In 2023, shortly after purchasing the plot, we made a plan with Viebrockhaus. They told us that with a cellar we could forget about the funding. However, maybe the sales representative was poorly informed. That was in any case a reason why we initially oriented more towards timber houses. A representative from Kampa said back then roughly that the timber house has the necessary reserves to compensate the poor climate balance of the concrete cellar, but only just.

Get in touch, e-mails can also be "dropped in" on Saturdays. There are still preliminary meeting appointments available for next week.

Thanks, mail has been "dropped in"!

Ouch. To me, this reads increasingly like "a layman burdens himself with fallacies before going to the architect and presents their results there as part of the specifications for the design." Guests from the family, but still sleeping on a different floor – that makes me think of the nonsense about the elderly bedroom. The property is flat enough for a vote against a basement; the attic (where you could also place a HAR) is large enough to make a basement completely obsolete; but the attic is "hard to reach" (probably means: attic hatch, because the staircase – despite the "bay window" – is awkwardly positioned). The house design is already a very concrete vision, but not discussed here, so the potential for improvement through the community was missed. How well must one have inherited to be so generously indifferent about their money?

You only realize in hindsight that these are fallacies. The guests already sleep upstairs with us. The room downstairs is purely a study. If I can no longer climb the stairs when I'm old, I'll move to a nursing home or assisted living. The basement doesn't only house the HAR but is also a pantry, laundry room, storage space. I can't really imagine putting all that in the attic. The pros and cons of a basement are definitely judged differently. As I said, my prior knowledge is mainly influenced by Mr. Beuler/Prefab house experts. Their videos/podcasts have a quite strong bias in favor of basements, with arguments understandable even for me as a layman, although I can also understand the counterarguments. Hopefully, the inheritance will take a few more decades.

With a 30° roof pitch (and I have not seen a gable roof excluded yet), the plan offers a fully usable attic, and I definitely wouldn’t want to give up the gables including the possibility of windows. Could the hip roof possibly even contribute to not being able to run the stairs all the way to the top? – with a half-hip roof, you could have the advantages of both roof types, and regionally it fits very well with Lüneburg.

I lack the visual understanding to answer that question! Our architect was initially also against a basement. The attic option was not discussed. Unfortunately, the possibility to present preliminary drafts here for discussion did not exist.

By the way, "following" me here brings exactly 0 points on the waiting list (and it doesn’t work any differently with the colleagues). I won’t say it again. If I haven’t heard from you by Tuesday before the start of Rosenheim Cops, I will close the calendar for the week.

That wasn’t the goal anyway :) The email is already sent.

We are in the district of Lüneburg

Then greetings from the neighboring district Harburg.

Wood houses have the necessary reserves to compensate for the poor climate balance of the concrete cellar, but only barely.

That would make me think if I were you.

The cellar not only houses the HAR but is also a storage room, laundry room, and storage space.

But that also means, conversely, that you have to walk two flights of stairs with the laundry – with 4 people, that’s a lot of floors per week. Then there has to be at least one level with a storage closet for quick access to the freezer or the broom. Ultimately, you plan at least half of the cellar just for storing something. An expensive hobby.

Our design foresees a hip roof. The roof pitch is 30°. There is indeed some storage space left. But poorly accessible.

Designs can be changed. They are only designs after all. I see it more as you have the desire for impractical townhouse villas, two-storied without roof slopes. That you are biting your own tail there and planning the house against common sense, you don’t think about that. Alternatives with a gable roof offer a lot more, even if you would still stay within budget. You can also burn money differently, and then the landscaping will be missing. And then you realize that the lawnmower or the bicycles don’t fit into the cellar either. Well then, I’m not trying to convince anyone here.