Single-family house on a south-facing slope at 900 meters above sea level

Hello hello,

now we have a floor plan from the architect that we already like very much. I would appreciate feedback from the forum with constructive criticism and suggestions for improvement. Let's work our way from bottom to top:

Basement:
Two rooms are to be used commercially here. Hence the separate "customer entrance" on the south side. We need the service entrance when we come from gardening or skiing in winter. The sports equipment etc. can be stored directly in the hobby room. Since we have planted a small orchard and I want to start beekeeping, there is a small storage room. The workshop corner in the technical room is obligatory.

Ground Floor:
We want an open kitchen-dining-living area for sociable hours including a tiled stove (there was already one in my parents' house and I just love that cozy warmth). The view to the southwest is unbeatable. So it needs large windows here. The guest room is sized so that a 120 x 200 m care bed should fit there, in case a parent is alone and in need of care. If the care bed is placed against the wall (it should be on wheels), a wheelchair can approach. The bathroom is designed to be accessible.

Upper Floor:
There are five of us. Each child gets their own room. For the time when they hit puberty, the two girls can share one bathroom and our son shares the large bathroom with us.

Regarding the heating system, I am still undecided. I have read a lot in the forum. There are opinions that solar thermal systems are too expensive to purchase and not cost-effective. Does a brine heat pump, for example, provide sufficient temperature at altitude (when coming in wet clothes from skiing and they need to dry)? The electricity is usually supplied by a photovoltaic system. This brings the challenge of storage. With an approximately 30-32° roof and usually four months of winter, electricity production will be repeatedly limited.

The local heating installer says: gas condensing boiler + water-carrying fireplace + small solar thermal system. But that seems to me not very sustainable, let alone innovative.

Looking forward to your feedback. And please don’t be surprised if I am not online for a day or two ... I am often away for work.

Let's work our way up from the bottom:

If anyone wants to scroll back, especially in search of the questionnaire:

A lot has changed (and someone stole the Musche-Pu-Pu-corner). The draft flew with the time machine into the present, which was probably a bit too fast for some of the originality, regional character, and charm (?)

I don't like the facades at all; each side, the eaves side and the gable side, is as strict as the other is too wild. Is the line under the upper floor supposed to indicate that the facade surface changes there?

All the double-wing windows are shown with mullions, but there must also be one with a casement, due to the second escape route.

According to the sectional drawing, the attic is still included in the thermal envelope—I assume this is due to the regional weather conditions (?)
By the way, I only see the hatch to the attic indicated "textually" ;-)

The differences to "my house" are now entirely a matter of taste; technically I find nothing to "complain about" :-)

If anyone wants to scroll back, especially looking for the questionnaire:

A lot has changed there (and someone stole the Musche-Pu-Pu corner). The design has flown with the time machine into the present, which was probably a bit too fast for some of the originality, regional character, and charm (?)

I don’t like the facades at all; each has one eaves side and one gable side, one as strict as the other is wild. Is the line under the upper floor supposed to indicate a change in the facade surface?

All the double-wing windows are shown with mullions, but one must also have a casement without mullions because of the second escape route.

According to the section drawing, the attic is still included in the thermal envelope – I assume this is due to the regional weather conditions (?)
By the way, I only see the attic hatch marked "textually" ;-)

The differences to "my house" are now entirely a matter of taste; technically I find nothing to "criticize" :)

Hello ant11,
the basement will of course be built solidly (I estimate waterproof concrete). On top of that comes a timber construction with wooden facade (either from the ground floor up or only the upper floor ... not quite clear yet).
We were convinced of the purely rectangular floor plan from the start. The subtleties should be noticeable inside: naturally cost-saving by only creating as much volume as necessary for comfortable living with the requirements described in the first post. And we are currently very satisfied with that – although it’s clear that some details (window locations relative to the bed, etc.) still need optimization.
Best regards

The guest bathroom is unfavorably arranged; no mirror fits above the sink. Additionally, it would bother me that a wellness shower (size-wise) is installed in the guest bathroom, while the narrow standard model is in the master bathroom.

Is the 2.72m ceiling height absolutely necessary? Especially on the children's room level, the rooms might appear uncomfortable and small. The ceiling height should match the floor area, otherwise the brain gets confused and the room seems smaller than it is. 15-20cm less wouldn't hurt; I don't think you are particularly tall, otherwise the interior doors would be larger. Ultimately, this can also save a lot of money.

Where has the prep kitchen gone?

3 entrances on 3 sides of the house at this height, someone must love snow shoveling. I would arrange the basement differently, maybe Kaho can come up with something. One entrance from where you can go to the practice and the hobby room. Also reduce the hallway and give the laundry its own room. With 5 people, a lot accumulates. You have to sort, the machine doesn't just run immediately, stains need to be soaked. Washing machine in the bathroom is something for rental apartments.

Do you really want such a narrow pantry on the ground floor? Cabinets drawn in there also fit in the kitchen. The guest bathroom should be reconsidered. If you plan to host a parent with you. Sitting backward on the toilet is a problem for obese, foot-impaired people. Some find sideways easier. On the space (here the heating chimney is an obstacle) a barrier-free bathroom fits.

Upstairs, only the washer/dryer in the bathroom is disturbing.

Overall better and a bit smaller, right?

The guest bathroom is inconveniently arranged; no mirror fits above the sink. Additionally, it would bother me that a wellness shower (in terms of size) is installed in the guest bathroom, while the master bathroom has the narrow standard model.

Is the 2.72m ceiling height absolutely necessary? Especially on the children's room level, the rooms might appear uncomfortable and small. The ceiling height should match the floor area; otherwise, the brain gets confused and the room seems smaller than it actually is. 15-20cm less wouldn't hurt, I don't think you are particularly tall, otherwise the interior doors would be bigger. Ultimately, this could also save a lot of money.

Well, I am 1.93m and my wife is 1.85m ... so above average height. Then we'd rather install a slightly larger front door ;-)

The ground floor bathroom is designed so that we can care for a parent in need of care there, e.g. driving a wheelchair into the shower. Hence the larger design.