Should the land be filled up or not?

Hello everyone,

our property is located between a street that runs along the front area and a private path that runs along the rear area. The private path is not suitable for access and driveway. This can only be done from the street.

Now the question arises as to at what height we should build the house. Should we orient ourselves to the street or to the private path?

If we orient ourselves to the private path, we would have to fill in 80-100 cm and the entrance of the house would probably have to be equipped with several steps. In addition, the driveway to the parking space would probably become quite steep.

If we orient ourselves to the street, the rear area would remain somewhat below the private path.

The street continues uphill to the west. The neighbor to the west has adapted his house to the houses in the second row and is very high up. His driveway is also very steep.

The neighbor to the north has leveled his property and placed his house completely level with the street.

Our property is in the middle. What would be the most sensible?

I have attached the elevation plan, hopefully visible.

Edit: The construction project would be a single-family house without basement!

What would be most sensible?

Top edge of finished floor = 22.50 P.S.: Top edge of finished floor = top edge of finished floor on the ground floor

Top edge of finished floor = 22.50

P.S.: Top edge of finished floor = top edge of finished floor on the ground floor

Thanks

If I understand this correctly as a "layman", then this would mean that approximately 1.20m height would have to be bridged over a depth of 3m between the street and the house entrance, right?!

Of course, it is the neighbor to the east who had built his house completely level with the street back then.

The house to the west also had to support the property towards the street, the house to the east naturally did not.

Can someone roughly estimate based on the elevation plan how high we have to support the property towards the street?

Be happy about the three-dimensional conditions! Some movement in the height profile of the property gives it a certain flair. Ask an architect how he can play with the conditions. Ours had an enormous imagination to place the now built shell for our life on a very three-dimensional property. By the way, the top edge of the finished floor is 10.5m above street level.

If I understand correctly as a "layperson," then that would mean that between the street and the house entrance on a 3m depth about 1.20m height would have to be bridged, right?!

That depends on what you want to build and where the building is to be placed. Do you want the "certain flair" or maximum return? Here is maximum return: [ATTACH alt="Lageplan2.png" type="full"]48662[/ATTACH] House dimensions approx. 11.80*11.50, ground floor, upper floor, attic as non-full floor, 3 residential units, 3 parking spaces House entrance accessed via path from the parking spaces, thus more distance to overcome the height difference. For true barrier-free access, the upper edge of the finished floor would have to be about 50cm lower, i.e. 22.00, or your planner comes up with something better, e.g. parking spaces to the west or with centimeter optimization further to the south respecting the floor area ratio. Edit:

Edit: Building project would be a single-family house without basement!

Oh! Overlooked. Show me what you have in mind (size, placement)

Do you want the "certain flair" or maximum return?

Great how you created the cost-optimized version. This is once again extremely valuable for the OP.
The term "maximum return" is somewhat misleading - one form of return in house construction is the satisfaction that comes from living in it. This can definitely be "flair-driven." As a builder, never forget when setting priorities around the wallet that the purpose of the house is habitation and not "saving."