Small Bungalow Floor Plan - Optimization Potential?

Thank you for the kind words.

Simply wow! Many thanks for your feedback - it is so great to be here!

I will relate this to us nice users.

With your desired house size, almost everything is open to you, because you hardly have to pay attention to significantly complicated statics. Small and fine can then here and there, for example in the wardrobe, also serve as a Pax as a built-in closet, so that even with little space there are storage options for clutter?!
Anyway: your two drafts are a good template - I'll take a look this evening to see if I have any simply good ideas. Or do you absolutely want this slant wall? (Don’t say anything wrong. . )

By the way: was the question about the plot width already answered? And how high are the neighboring houses? Is there already a neighbor on the right side of the plan?

Small and fine can then here and there, for example in the cloakroom, also serve as a built-in wardrobe as a , so that even with little space there are storage options for the clutter?!

Yep, the Pax is welcome to move in. I like it practical.

Or do you definitely want this slanted wall? (Don’t say anything wrong. . )

No, it isn’t absolutely necessary. I saw it on the Hanse Haus floor plan "Bungalow 80" and found it quite nice because it’s something different than just straight. But it’s not a must-have. That’s kind of you to want to take a closer look at my “masterpieces” – thank you! Plot width: measured on Boris BW online approx. 18 m Neighboring buildings: meanwhile on the right and left, both with basements and garages and two stories. Both have the garages on “my” property boundaries. Hope you understand what I mean...

I have two more, but please don’t laugh, I tried to be creative. You have to mentally rotate the angled bungalow 180 degrees so that north is at the top and south at the bottom. I’m only posting them because I find it charming that there would already be a roof over the terrace, but I can’t judge whether that makes sense price-wise. With the staggered floor plan, I like the front entrance and it would also have a canopy right away... But the interior layout of both is not ideal...

That means there's probably no way around the architect, right? I'm still undecided about that.
@11ant regarding this
Module A, dough resting with soft setting – then it's clearer.
I would like to contact you by email. I just don't have a clear thread in the whole story yet.

Received – the answer too? (the red thread is on the same page)

No, it's not necessarily required. I saw that on the Hanse Haus floor plan "Bungalow 80" and thought it was quite nice, because it's something different than just straight lines. But it's not a must-have.

I think the way you implemented it fits well.

Richard or George would indeed probably move in experimentally in the attic.

Richard is already 75 and would then please need a "proper" staircase up there; Georg Kluny is only 63.

No one will laugh, why should they, since you are expressing your thoughts/wishes. In the end, you will ultimately have to decide (for yourself) how it all fits together. In the walking part, it is rather helpful to learn about the little things in order to better imagine the whole.

Your idea about the heating system also sounds good; I am totally open to going a way off the standard with the air-water heat pump. It has to fit the house (size). Unfortunately, I’m a bit of a cold person and like it warm. Comfort temperature is from 23 degrees.

That was just an idea; there are others, although the topic of the fireplace and its use could influence further decisions. It always gets warm, and if well insulated, much more easily. Almost any heating system can be adapted to the house, also KfW-compliant; it has to fit your heating habits. But that can grow, first the floor plan.
Otherwise, the relevant people have understood you or what might fit for you. Your active participation and noticeable openness help enormously.
We have controlled residential ventilation, but there are also two floors, and I would forget to ventilate or would be too lazy to do so. If it’s different for you, then you don’t need that either. That’s exactly how it should be, you are like that, so you don’t need to buy it.
I understand the approach regarding technology very well; not least for that reason, we additionally decided on the IR modules. If one breaks, it is reordered and clicked in, done. Our craftsmen here were a drama, and I wanted to be as little dependent on them as possible in the future. The setup of the domestic hot water heat pump as well as the controlled residential ventilation only happens via continuous phone calls with the manufacturer and was done on “auto,” even though this is a designated specialist company.

So, there’s probably no way around the architect, or? I’m still undecided there.

I don’t think so. I think the floor plan professionals here can help you enough so that you ultimately get the right floor plan for you. The rest or concerns can then be brought in by the chosen house builder. Once the first papers are crumpled, it will also become clearer how it will basically turn out; it will be fine.
Where the floor cushion is now, there can later be a table, or maybe an option will arise during the kitchen planning.
The thread develops on its own as your floor plan develops. Your active participation will lead to a good result; unfortunately, not everyone has understood that.
A first floor plan from has already been indicated. Your drafts for it. After that, the journey begins, because people enjoy it when they can help.

Oops, I glossed over that aspect earlier:

So there's apparently no way around the architect, right? I'm still undecided about that.

The path doesn’t mean a simple “yes or no” decision to see the architect, but often also “a little bit.” My house construction schedule recommends in any case “initially a little bit,” meaning not to make the architect contract all-in-one, where the architect is commissioned for service phases 1 through 8 “in one go.” Rather, one should take a pause in between to chew and swallow. How and whether to proceed with the architect afterward, I explain specifically in the “Reloaded” episodes following the basic series of the schedule parts 1 to 5.

Anyone following my suggestion first completes module A with the architect and then—very important!—(alone) lets the dough rest. At the end of module A, you have a preliminary design with which you can (with or without the architect—as is reportedly illegal in Hamburg, a right to submit is already demanded here) submit a building preliminary inquiry to the municipality as well as an initial orientation inquiry (setting the course, with or without me) to a handful of providers.

With the answers from the course setting, it becomes clear whether the project will remain within budget and whether it is (instead of usually an exercise in futility) cheaper in individual cases to build timber or stone. So now you know whether the preliminary design should be further developed as timber or stone. It is helpful to know this before continuing the planning. In the course settings conducted by me or following my approach, participants’ responses also include whether and which proven house designs (speculative houses or also individual custom homes) from their portfolio resemble the preliminary design underlying the inquiry. The resemblance primarily refers to fitting the same framework conditions (customer wishes, development plan, and the like), and often also includes the building shape.

So now you have the choice whether to make the current preliminary design (usually by one — mostly the same — architect) or a proven alternative (also by the architect or by a planner from the builder/house manufacturer) the starting material for the design. Whether to commission the architect for the full module B or only service phase 3 has by now become clearer.