Single-family house with double garage on a slope - plan optimization

Hello,

I have been a silent reader here for quite some time. After a long planning phase, we have now received our design for a single-family house. Due to the hillside location, the project repeatedly causes us major headaches (additional costs due to complete basement, problems with the boundary construction of the garage). We are not completely dissatisfied with the design, but in our opinion, the house has become too large. We are now looking for ways to sensibly optimize the floor plan so as not to further strain our budget. The arrangement of the windows, façade design, and window positions are not at all final in this design as we do not like them as they are.
It is also being considered to go from three stories to a floor plan with a basement (the 2nd residential unit would then be removed). At the moment, I am not quite comfortable with this or do not know if the savings (minus the loss of the 2nd KfW grant) would still be that high.

I am really looking forward to your opinions on the plan.

Development plan/restrictions
Plot size: 675 m²; approx. 27 m wide on the street side, 25 m deep
Slope: yes, sloping southwest about 3.5 m over 25 m and slightly rising to the east at the street
Site coverage ratio: 0.3
Floor area ratio: 0.4
Building envelope: 3 meters to the street, 10 meters to the boundary in the southwest (5 m of this is local edge greenery)
Edge construction: no
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of floors: max. 2
Roof form: gable roof
Style: modern
Orientation: ridge east-west
Maximum heights/limits: wall height 6.5 m, ridge height 9 m
Other requirements: 5 m green strip on the southwest property boundary, infiltration, etc., but otherwise nothing special

Clients’ requirements
Style, roof form, building type: modern, gable roof 18° (will still be changed in the plan)

Basement, floors: 2 full floors + basement
Number of persons, age: 2 adults, eventually 2 children
Space requirements on the ground floor: cloakroom, shower WC, office/guest room, kitchen, living-dining room
Space requirements on the upper floor: 2 children’s rooms, parents, dressing rooms, parents’ bathroom, optional: children’s bathroom/toilet separate
Office: regularly 1-4 days home office per week
Overnight guests per year: regularly (large extended family)
Open or closed architecture: open
Conservative or modern construction method: modern construction with open style, building envelope rather classic with flat gable roof
Open kitchen, cooking island: kitchen open, with work island
Number of dining seats: usually 4-6
Fireplace: yes
Music/stereo wall: media wall for TV
Balcony, roof terrace: balcony for the children
Garage, carport: double garage
Utility garden, greenhouse: garden with small utility section (herbs in terrace beds, etc.)
Further wishes/special features/daily routine, also reasons why this or that should/should not be:
- children’s bathroom not an absolute must
- large cloakroom
- generous open living and dining area
- possibly open attic

House design
Who made the plan:
- draftsman

What do you particularly like?
Open and spacious, many of our wishes could be taken into account. We wanted to keep the main body elongated to preserve as much garden as possible (due to the local edge greenery we lose 5 m in the front)
What don’t you like? Why?
On the upper floor, the three rooms on the south side feel a bit squeezed, we would generally also like to make the house a bit smaller, but we lack ideas here.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: approx. 600,000
Personal price limit for the house, including fittings: very hard to say
Preferred heating technology: gas is planned due to existing connection, possibly also a heat pump or a hybrid system of both

If you had to forego, which details/extensions
- children’s bathroom,
- staircase design (spiral staircase is not desired), size in general because due to the slope there is a lot of space in the basement (garage must also be basemented)

Why did the design become what it is? For example
We have been dealing with the topic for a long time and have already planned many variants. I (client) like a straight staircase, but the client’s spouse does not want it immediately in the living area. The mix of both is now this variant, but we are not sure whether a better design would be possible with another staircase type (e.g., landing stairs). Due to the location at the village edge and the free view to the southwest, our planner placed the parents’ bedroom together with the children’s rooms on one side on the upper floor; here we fear it has become a bit tight or a lot of space on this floor is wasted.
Since we do not want to build the terrace as a balcony structure, it will mostly be filled in, possibly the part above the 2nd residential unit will then be extended by a frame. Because we lose a lot of garden area due to this filling, we have decided on a narrower floor plan.
A major problem for a long time was the boundary construction of the garage; here we have now teamed up with the neighbor, who is attaching his garage to ours. So we have a straight driveway and no problem with wall height.

What is the most important/basic question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
The house seems a bit too large in relation to the room sizes. Could the floor plan be optimized, or where are we wasting space?
Is the room arrangement on the upper floor sensible as it is, or could we possibly use the space differently/better/more spaciously?
Should we possibly plan very differently because of the slope and use the basement as living space to save an entire floor?

A very similar house was discussed here about 3 weeks ago. It looks almost exactly the same, only the granny flat in the basement there is intended as a practice.

On the upper floor, the three rooms on the south side seem a bit cramped, we would also generally like to make the house a bit smaller, but we lack ideas here.

I don’t think it looks cramped. It won’t be, only the large hallway, caused by the stairs, takes up a lot of space. However, I would also mention that the view for children’s rooms is somewhat overrated. But here it fits well with the orientation.

Spiral staircase is not desired),

What do you mean by spiral staircase? Spiral means round....

and use the basement as living space in order to save a whole floor?

That is very likely!!!

Since we lose a lot of garden space due to this filling, we decided on a narrower floor plan.

... you could do without the filling... one less floor brings a lot of budget savings.

2nd residential unit would then be dropped). At the moment, I cannot quite come to terms with this or know if the savings (minus the loss of the 2nd KfW grant) would still be that high.

More living space always costs more money. You cannot make up for that with a subsidy. 100 sqm extra costs 200,000€, especially with finishes like sanitary, technology, and kitchen! It is how it is! I would plan the basement nicely as a living level with direct access (without expensive filling) and upstairs the sleeping level. Then maybe 5-10 sqm more on each level. You get rid of all problems and also the annoyance that living with a tenant, practically next door in the garden, entails.

I think it’s pretty good overall, to be honest! You only save space if the straight staircase can be removed – that one needs at least 12-13 meters, I think. Is the 600k just for the house or without additional construction costs, etc.?

A similar house was discussed here about 3 weeks ago. It looks almost exactly the same, only the granny flat in the basement there is intended as a practice.

Hehe, it actually looks like by a considerably younger architect.

I am in favor of planning the basement as a living level and one floor less
- saves more costs than the funding ever provides
- the multi-family house appearance disappears
- garden and living become one unit without a mini terrace that was filled up at great expense.

Why is the garage in the west and not in the east?
What is the terrain slope?

I always think it is a planning mistake when the living room is planned on the south side by the terrace. There is no connection whatsoever between sitting outside and the living room. And when watching TV, it is only disturbing if the sun causes glare. That is why the kitchen has to be exactly where the living room is planned now. Drinks and barbecue supplies are rarely located in the TV board.