Semi-detached house in Hamburg with general contractor on own land, two + full attic floors, no basement

How is one supposed to imagine that?

Well, a relative standard. Fixed prices tiered for service phases 1-3 (always only together), service phase 4 (fully) and parts from later SPs. But then it depended on what the GCs would do. Of course, as soon as the GCs didn’t take on much here, it would of course have become significantly more expensive and he would have also billed according to HOAI.

When am I supposed to have written that?

Sorry, then I summarized that incorrectly.

that Germany could cast the super-general contractor with it.

That would be a new show idea! That was not meant that way by me either. What I wanted to get at: If two GCs submit bids for quite different houses (external dimensions, windows, equipment and so on), then they are hardly comparable. That was the result despite all efforts when we tried to obtain bids without specifying a prior plan. (Setting aside that many GCs were really very good at ignoring the development plan and what was discussed beforehand.)

Trockenbauwarzen produziert.

... what is meant by that?

I think the wishlist needs to be cut first or the budget increased. Also, such restrictions like 80sqm of floor space are usually a hindrance in planning for tightly calculated construction projects. It's better to give the architect complete freedom and mention that you also want a garden. Preferably more specific like a terrace and vegetable patch or just a terrace for one person, the other a football field, etc.

Sorry, then I summarized that incorrectly.

That may have been preceded by me having expressed myself ambiguously in part. Can you show me (by naming post numbers or similar) where you have read the misunderstandings?

What I was getting at: If two general contractors submit bids for quite different houses (external dimensions, windows, fittings, and so on), then they are hardly comparable.

There are independent building consultants (at least for "prefab" houses, I have already mentioned colleagues here several times) who can provide you with a preselection, so you don’t compare a Mazda with a Maserati across the board. Often it only takes one conversation (or a few thread dialogues) for a professional to recognize which providers correspond to the building family by type. This way, statistical outliers can be prevented in advance. That costs far, far less than paying an architect to create a drafting template for the GC. The more significant comparability disruptor than differing dimensions are those in the construction service descriptions, against which a concretely fixed building volume does not help at all.
How close to the goal are you?

... what is meant by that?

When builders are supposed to build according to building permit drawings, too many questions are still open or there is the risk that they will be resolved instead by the respective "method do-it-this-way." Without a slot in the wall, the downpipe is then laid in front and boxed in with drywall.

I think, first the red pencil must be applied to the wish list here

For the red pencil, the wish list would first have to be taken out of the fog.

Besides, such restrictions as 80 sqm floor area are usually hindering for tightly budgeted building projects during planning.

Yes and no. The 140/145 sqm II+D SD35-38 semi-detached house of the usual suspects is about 6m wide per half in 12.5m depth, so the "eighty" threshold is not even close to being broken here; and here it is even allowed to be more generous in terms of the number of floors (although the OP has not yet sketched a verifiable house profile).

I also have a bit of a problem with the drawn plot: is it distorted like that or is it due to photographing it not parallel to the plane? Roughly estimated, I also don’t get 700sqm. And should it be oriented to North?

Has the plot already been purchased?

The budget issue is obvious. If you calculate 3000€/sqm, then you will have to contribute quite a bit in terms of personal effort. I suggest drawing the plot on graph paper, then determining the building area, and then the task of dividing the plot in such a way that a simple building structure and the desired garage(s), terrace, and marking of the entrance side are possible. Since it is possible that the life situation of one party may change, plan one division and two independent halves. “Shared use” can only be arranged through ownership by one or both parties with a contract. Otherwise, the dependent “halves” will be difficult to sell.

I believe this is also our main concern: Does it have to be the budget? How much does it have to be increased? Actually, not much is possible. What idea of a semi-detached house do we have to give up? Which wishes are expressed or maybe unspoken and should go in the trash?

As the next quotes show, we can approach this from several sides (the fourth option would probably be winning the lottery or other minimally more likely ways to change the budget):
1. The house could be smaller than usual for 5 people,
or
2. we could reduce costs through own work,
or
3. we find a catalog house that is cost-effective and somewhat suitable.

1.

It might help you to calculate backwards. I'll subtract 30K for additional costs, which is already extremely tight: Leaving 370K/3K = 123 sqm. Now go and find a floor plan with 4 bedrooms + office in a semi-detached house with only 123 sqm. That will probably be hard to impossible. If you then add special features like later divisibility, it becomes completely absurd.

2.

I think even the "budget providers" (so only basics) will not be an option with this requirement profile.
==> That does not fit the budget

I see only one way: massive self-labor

The budget problem is obvious. If you calculate 3000€/sqm, then you have to do quite a bit of self-labor.

3.

The "standard" semi-detached house from the "usual suspects" for this building type offers II+D (SD 35°) 140 to 145 sqm and sends the parents to sleep in the attic studio with three children. Cutting another 20 sqm there really pinches everywhere

The approaches alone will probably not work, so something must be combined. Here is the question: What would be the advice? Build minimal smaller and do a lot yourself? Catalog house and own work? Architect and build smaller, only shell construction, rest self-labor? Or or or? Preferably with a brief reason.

In all the posts, because of the background from the thread, there are still special wishes included. It is brought up again and again:

Then at least prepare the D for finishing (so at least insulated, ceiling, stairs, pipes, etc. fixed and for 400 in Hamburg? No. Not with these individual wishes.

This is not meant as a reproach, but to steer the discussion in a different direction: separability is off the table, we are willing to give up all sorts of special wishes. Please tell me what we should possibly give up. (We will certainly notice some of this ourselves when comparing catalog house offers. But I also want to be better prepared to request adjustments in the general contractor’s offer.)

And now something about the plot: Plan was created quickly. The building envelope is dimensioned, approximately as indicated. Plot dimensions are missing but total 700 sqm. Details will come another time, I have no more time right now. Only: Some semi-detached houses from the catalog do not fit because they are too long (i.e. each half is too wide).

Building plot 12*18, is that the building plot for the entire house or for half of it

Is a ridge direction specified? Where is north?