Small house on large towel plot

No, it is the most expensive, because you let (heating) energy escape through an open window. Hence the general advice for controlled residential ventilation.

No, it concerns the warm half of the year, when the heating is off.

If the hobby here is such a secret, then one has to generalize as a respondent.

It’s no secret. The connection made between the floor plan and the hobby was surprising to me. I had assumed that the statement that a basement is necessary for some of my hobbies was sufficient. See my previous post.

I personally fundamentally criticize that where one lives, it is relatively tight, and in return comes with costs and rather invests the money in a basement. In my lifestyle, and you have also argued this way, one wants everyday living to be spacious, bright, and comfortable. You achieve this by keeping walking space, not placing furniture too close to the windows, and so on.

Living room or other rooms as well: 30 cm more or less can already be decisive. You also have to be able to pass through a sliding door. Here, the chimney is a disturbing factor as well as the lack of width. And yes: I would allocate the extra space to the chill area and assign it to the dining or kitchen area. If an area, like the dining area here, also has to serve as a passage to other functions, then it should also function as such. But it does not here.

What iteration is this now? I get the feeling that while all sorts of things are being criticized, actually only the dining and fireplace area is a real problem. Even the repeatedly invoked cost counterargument is essentially irrelevant to the floor plan.

Whether you can “turn around” in the living area plays no role at all when watching TV.

Oh, suddenly? No “whether” is needed here. You can. I have already explained that.

And yes, a sauna is actually better located outside, since after sauna use, for example, you enter a jacuzzi or an ice barrel. Whatever. But I can also understand if you plan it indoors, provided the room allows it.

Thanks for your opinion, mine is different. And the room allows it.

Then just ask what is unergonomic about the kitchen.

I already did. See here:

Stove in the middle, storage space to the right and left, fridge to the left and sink two steps away to the right, dishwasher next to the sink, spaces for small appliances available, additionally large preparation surface, storage space within reach, what is unergonomic about that?

One simply assumes the normal daily routine of a normal family. That also includes not just having guests “together” sometimes, independent sports broadcasts (with friends), Tupperware parties (figuratively other convivial gatherings of one or the other). It may be that this is currently not the case with you. Perhaps it is due to the current situation? Humans adapt. That means: if the room is not available, then no events take place.

The arc is simply too long for me. It is human nature to see oneself as the norm. If that is normal for you, you naturally need rooms that accommodate that.

That is because you already talk about a final plan with a layman’s floor plan and have gotten very stuck on details…

Have I? That is what I said in the initial post:

There are now plenty of design variants. Four or five of these are basically acceptable for us, each with different advantages and disadvantages. This is one of them, the one with the smallest living area. … Many details are not yet finalized (e.g., stairs to the attic, windows, ...) because I lack knowledge and experience.

Note the word “final.” Note the word before it. A little later I wrote

This is no longer a preliminary draft.

I assume that between “preliminary draft” and “final” there is room for “draft.” And I regard the floor plan as such.

…and let’s be honest: you are convinced of the design and no longer open to a more functional variant.

Let’s be honest. That is another assumption. And “functional” is such a nice meaningless meta-word into which anyone can read whatever they want. As I wrote a few lines above (and in the original post), I have a handful of other designs. This is merely the smallest. Why would I have the others if this convinced me so unshakably?

You have already recognized, before posting it here, that there is one or another bottleneck. You also see two or three things now.

Apart from “functional” deficits, right?

That ultimately means that your work, i.e., entering the design into a program, was somehow pointless. A patchwork like Tetris usually leads to much bigger defects.

Not at all! It helped me enormously. And my wife, who demands to see floor plans in 3D. Only smaller stuff is patched. Bigger things and restarts happen in Paint.

For a basement, you can calculate €1000-1500 per sqm. That means in your case, with 80 sqm floor area, €80 - 120 thousand.
The parapets of 75 cm on the upper floor are by the way too low and not permitted.

Thanks. Those are valuable pieces of information. They help. More of that kind, please.

I guess the problem here is that you are planning alone for yourself ...

Yes

... and you don’t confront yourself with realities or facts that are unknown to you.

Haha, that was a good one.

You tinker for two years on the perfect house and don’t even ask the forum about this or that.

That’s partly true, if we remove "perfect" from the sentence. My life situation has changed in many ways over the last years. What would have been perfect two years ago is no longer so today. And in two years it will be different again. Therefore, I consider the term perfect to be highly subjective and fluid. It also took a long time to find out what I really want/need/would like/can ignore. I did not waste time, but started early. And I am not planning for now, but for the near future. Can you see somewhere how old my account is here?

You rely on your knowledge and only use that. Maybe that’s why the living area is almost identically planned as you know it.

That’s almost a coincidence, it resulted from the location of the open living space in this (and only this) draft. But it had the advantage of confirming or dispelling certain concerns about measurements and distances by measuring the real object.

Heating costs will not be halved. In about 90% or so of cases heating costs only occur from October to April. A cozy fireplace, even a better kind, supports but does not replace.

My mistake, sorry. The heating costs were halved, but not only because of the fireplace. A significant part of the savings came from switching water heating to electricity, from the photovoltaic system or batteries. Therefore, the main heating system only runs three months a year, and even then only at base load. That wouldn’t be possible without a good fireplace (and without photovoltaics).

No, certainly a sauna house is not free. But at least it is cheaper than a living sqm at 3000€. Besides, something like that (a house) serves to generously design one’s living space within one’s own property. Most enjoy walking 20 meters to the sauna instead of just staying in the family bathroom.

I understand, unfortunately I am not one of the majority. So the sauna in the bathroom "wastes" about 6000 euros. If we subtract the price of the sauna house from that, how much savings are we talking about?

Gladly more of this kind.

I think you are in the wrong forum if you want to be snappy and judge the quality of the answers. Besides, there are overlaps in the response structure that probably should not be judged, just as we are not snappy about the fact that information only comes upon request. Ultimately, you are here in a floor plan discussion and not in the specialist area "windows." How others deal with you is up to them - I'm out of here.

No one denied that either. How it was or is with others, I do not know; it has helped me a lot to recognize and distinguish dreams, wishes, and necessities.

The term preliminary draft denotes a (if it is to be good, indispensable!) maturity stage of concept development (service phase 2) – not a draft (service phase 3) that merely does not yet reach full satisfaction.

And I would have assumed that a good preliminary draft convinces by good room layout, regardless of the medium it was created on.
A change in a paint-clicked draft is faster than on a scribbled one and you can always revert to an earlier state, if saved. What exactly was the advantage of scribbled?

A good preliminary draft convinces by being a balanced equation – if not, it should be thrown away instead of erased. The advantage of scribbled is to increasingly recognize at an earlier stage on every repetition at which point the wrong turn was taken. Or put simply: years of learning instead of lost years.

I would not have expected that a 4cm wall thickness difference in a draft is so important.
With 60x42cm stones, clean mortar joints are easy to achieve. I managed that myself even with 50x36cm stones.

The difference between 20 cm and 24 cm is not 4 cm, but the fundamental one between "generalized" and "concrete."
Clean mortar joints require that the contemporary dry interlocking replaces the previously usual mortaring. The joint is then nevertheless mortared wet again.

The assumption referred to the budget issue, not to the fact that a basement is expensive. Was that ambiguous?
Why a basement is explained in the opening post.

That a basement is (absolutely) expensive is not doubted at all by the 11ant basement rule. It rather serves to answer the question whether a basement built in the concrete case is really (relatively) more expensive than avoided.

Whoever finds a display cozy should use it. I find fireplaces beautiful, therefore fireplace.
On my property are dozens of solid cubic meters of wood that have to be felled for construction. With that, I can feed a fireplace for years. Or I let the wood rot because some people do not like fireplaces.
Water-bearing fireplaces widen or even buffer the heat emission. Cheap polemics do not change that either.

No polemics occurred. The effect and purpose of the water-bearing system are known to me, here a fireplace simulation must of course fit (of course against advantages that have to be weighed). Whether you are allowed to fell without forest conversion just because the property is already designated as building land, I linked you reading tips (concrete from Brandenburg). By the way, it is not people but building regulations that "do not like" fireplaces. They are often demanded as all-encompassing "factory chimneys" and get their locations dictated by spacing requirements; and they always require agreement with the chimney sweep as well as regular visits. The efficiency of their coziness contribution can be argued almost more tastefully than factually.

I have read the thread attentively and come to the conclusion that you probably act thoughtfully and independently and consciously accept the disadvantages of your planning. Everyone has different requirements, and we also live in a house that hardly cares about what "one" usually does.
Large kitchen, small "lounge area," with many people it simply gets cramped – all decisions understandable to me. Much has already been exchanged regarding windows and the guest room.
Nevertheless, I have a few thoughts to contribute:

1. On the upper floor, you have the option to enlarge the bedroom by the hallway area if you waive the hallway window.
2. Passage to the property – You do not need heavy equipment for the forest. I write from experience. If you want or need to fell a tree, a chainsaw and possibly a winch will suffice. You can make and stack wood on site. To what extent you want to proceed with "heavy equipment" in garden design is up to you to consider. I would at least provide enough width for a mini excavator.
3. Regarding the heating system – Besides cost-effectiveness and resale value, in my view, the comfort through temperature control plays a major role – and that is an individual matter that directly affects living quality. I would never want floor heating again – we had that in the first house. Now we are happy with a combination of a masonry stove (would take up too much space in your case, but regarding efficiency it is politically safe – if reason prevailed) and infrared. Infrared does have higher operating costs, but it is inexpensive in purchase and has no maintenance costs. Of course, resale value counts what "one" defines as standard. I don’t care much as long as I have better living quality in the meantime.
4. Regarding the stove – the installation location, chimney routing, and the idea to connect a water jacket do not seem well thought out to me. I think of minimum distances, sight lines, space for maintenance (also of the water jacket), etc. From my point of view, a stove, whether a wood stove or masonry stove, is much more than "furniture." The technical prerequisites and consideration of output, heating curve, etc. belong in the house planning. In the two children’s apartments, we each have a wood stove. Those things are really nice, but they take up a lot of space, and the heating curve does not match well with the insulation standard. If you know this connection and accept the disadvantages, it can be exactly right. Only false expectations would be unfortunate.
5. On your property, it would also be no problem to place the garage / carport as a separate building elsewhere. That would give you design freedom on the property regarding the accessibility of the garden part behind the house.

Regarding the budget, I say nothing. Wishes usually cost money. If it is not enough to fulfill them, it is worth thinking about what comes closest to the wishes. And it is worth setting priorities. The following considerations helped us:
1. How much cost can be saved by not fulfilling this wish?
2. To what extent does fulfilling the wish directly contribute to our quality of life? (what is really behind it)
3. Which alternatives to this wish serve the same goal? (see 2)
4. What does it mean to fulfill the wish later? (effort, costs...)
5. What’s the point of the nonsense? (§9 Cologne Basic Law) Meaning: After some time, reconsider question 2.

We did not implement a few wishes. These include the hillside elevator (only missed on a few days per year), the aluminum-wood windows (we don’t notice daily that they are plastic windows, the tactile quality is better than previously assumed), the folding glass walls also in the children’s apartments (one has now become my office. The terrace door is sufficient. In the living room, the folding walls are great, that suffices), the sauna (there will be a barrel...), the green roofing on the pitched roof facing north side (the "absence" is not noticed at all), the carport (was approved but built later). For well-being in a house, "features" are less important than many assume.

I would build the chimney in the upper corridor corner on the right side of the plan.

Please excuse the late reply, I somehow overlooked the post. That would be the perfect solution on the ground floor (for the chimney position), but unfortunately it doesn't fit in the current upper floor. The chimney would stand in front of the bedroom door. But since the ground floor has to be changed anyway, I will also have more options for the upper floor. These 45° walls are not really great either. Oh. Of course I start with the upper floor. That's clear. I would never try anything else.