Single-family house approx. 150 sqm. Your ideas and suggestions?

Hello everyone,

attached are the first drafts.
I would like to share these with you.
Maybe you have some ideas and suggestions.

Thanks in advance!

Development plan/restrictions
Plot size: 550 sqm
Slope: yes, approx. 1.0 - 1.5m or according to the plans.
Floor area ratio--0.3
Plot ratio--0.5
Number of parking spaces: double garage 6x9 (instead of 6x6 because we want to use the additional +3m as storage space for bicycles, etc.) + garden house.
Number of floors: 2
Roof type: gable roof 35 DN. 20cm roof overhang (we find this visually better. Not too little? Risk due to weather effects is limited?)

Requirements of the builders
Style, roof shape, building type
KfW40+, 2 floors
Number of persons, ages 4: 1yr, 5yr, 35yr, 35yr
Space requirements on ground floor, upper floor
Office: family use with study on ground floor
Overnight guests per year: 2-4 times in guest/office room on ground floor with fold-out couch + desk, occasional home office
Open architecture
Open kitchen, kitchen island
Number of dining seats 6-8
Fireplace: no
Double garage.
Utility garden.
Smart home.
Laundry chute from upper floor bathroom -> utility room.
Good playground is only about 100m away.

House design
Who is responsible for the planning:

- Architect
Cost estimate: contract already signed.
Personal price limit for the house, incl. equipment:
Preferred heating technology: air-to-water heat pump + central ventilation + photovoltaic + storage

Foundation slab.
Building ground / soil report: According to soil report and neighbors, good, firm, unproblematic ground. Soil class 4-5. Partly with sandstone layers running through the building ground.

It's a pity that, firstly, you take the trouble to remove the site plan from the Nordung and, secondly, do not mention why the planning is deliberately extended beyond the building envelope.

Turning the site plan out of the north direction

sorry, I don't understand your question. What do you mean by that?

[...] why deliberately planned beyond the building envelope [...]

Simply to achieve more living space.

sorry, don't understand your question. What do you mean?

Well, on the site plan you can see at the edges that it was originally oriented to north; and then you rotated it and now the garden is "up" instead of north and we all have to turn our laptops to understand your plans according to the cardinal directions. If that happens because an original plan was not oriented to north, that's at least forgivable. But why would someone intentionally de-orient a plan?

Simply to achieve more living space.

Everyone wants that. What makes you think you'll get an exemption for that – did you practice the sweetest puppy eyes in front of the mirror?

The design is cleverly drawn to fit the terrain. Surely you have already obtained a signal from the building authority that building outside the building envelope has a chance of approval.

The location of the garage is understandable due to the slight slope; if necessary, I would set the garage a little lower to get more light into the living area. I find the room layout quite well done - surely the straight staircase takes up some space, but as a central element in the darkest part of the house, it works well as an eye-catcher. You will hear different opinions about the air space here - sense of space versus noise insulation. It’s good that the dressing room is not planned as a fixed room but can be furnished into the large bedroom if needed. The kitchen counter directly adjacent to the dining table doesn’t appeal to me - it’s a matter of taste. Also, the positioning of the sofa in the living area, but that is probably ideal for screen-oriented leisure activities - we prefer to talk, read, and look out the window.

I find it funny how many architecture programs show BMW vehicles - here they are E34s, and in a front view, one is transformed into an E31. These are vehicles from the 90s. It was the same with our architect, by the way.

Well, on the site plan you can see at the edges that it was originally oriented to the north; and then you rotated it, and now the garden is "up" instead of north, and we all have to turn our laptops to understand your plans according to the cardinal directions. If this happens because an original plan wasn't north-oriented, at least that's forgivable. But why would anyone deliberately remove the north orientation from a plan?

Everyone wants that. What makes you think you will get an exemption because of that—did you practice the sweetest dog eyes in front of the mirror?

I understand—it was not clear to me that the issue of north orientation is so important and common. The original plan was like that.

The architect is very confident about an exemption regarding the building window override. Also with exceeding the maximum FH.