Special floor plan or boring with basement?

I am just describing my situation and do not want to start any recommendations or discussions here about which type of building is better or worse. It can be the other way around for everyone and at any time.

First of all, thanks – such "Gingun-like stories" are often much more valuable to those affected than the most technically sound recommendations, or at least they are indispensable supplements to them. None of the building methods is the stone (or the wood or the clay or whatever) of wisdom for everyone, and conversely none of the others is always worse. And last but not least: what use are the many roads to Rome if you want to go to Paris? – I always recommend not to decide or commit prematurely. In many individual cases exactly one is better, and in just as many cases the other or a third. And also quite often it ends in a "draw" or more positively put a "broad variety of possible paths."

My impression is that prefabricated house builders (not all but certainly many) have a corset, and if you don’t fit in there, you pay.

By the way, "Prefab house Guido" (Freyermuth, to mention a third well-known colleague) says something similar. And this particularly applies to providers who explicitly position themselves as "affordable."

Our plan was then also to give the floor plan to other prefabricated houses/solid construction to get a few offers and, in general, to be able to compare something. With such an amount / a project and especially without any expertise, we don’t want to put all our eggs in one basket.

That horizon of expectation is probably a bit exaggerated, but I would approach it quite similarly – mind you, also with four decades of expertise. Four or five providers, mixed wood and stone, I have in sight for the "critical decision."

Do you also have recommendations on who one could talk to?

That depends on the region; here in the forum Danwood is quite well regarded when it comes to economy.

I still don’t know whether to start from zero again or if we have to. With the original plan (the extension was originally angled) we already found the whole thing pretty good and it basically met all our wishes.

Yes, definitely: you have to. The planning is practically unusable – because it is not insignificant to be unable to implement it within the budget. And you cannot bend it back in. Don’t see the new beginning as an undeserved stab in the back for a design already dear to your heart, but as a transformation into its "new life in a completely changed form." The "architect" simply bungled here unprofessionally; I definitely wouldn’t let him back in. A "corner-oriel" is unfortunately just a bungled incapacity sold as a treat to insert the room program into a frame. Basically, a mistake that ironically is gladly accepted by the market.

I have already read the rule here and also checked the corresponding blog. We have very little "slope" (60cm), so according to the rule, a basement is probably not very sensible. In addition, there are poor soil conditions.

Replacing soil doesn’t gain you space but still adds to the cost side. If it ultimately comes down to "no basement," the cost center "below ground floor" still won’t remain empty. So even for a basement not built, your house will have to be smaller above ground.

Does that mean you offer mediation to an architect? Or basically support with floor plan planning?

Finding architects, floor plan coaching, finding construction companies, and much more. Just go from the "Preparation" category to the "Services" category. In your case initially "small planning critique," "large planning critique," and "critical decision."

We wanted to do that building inquiry now together with the architect. But he said that the house’s outside dimensions should already be fixed for it, including location on the plot and important parameters like roof shape, number of floors, basement yes/no. According to a phone inquiry by the architect at the building authority, everything is allowed. I’m also attaching an aerial photo here, so you can see the slope of the plot. Red = roughly one side of the house. On the street are only old buildings, and then to the right a new development area. Does that help to clarify?

Yes, that helps – although less than hoped – to clarify. The shape of the house should already be fixed (to preliminary design quality) for a building inquiry, yes. Here it is probably more dispensable than feared. Nevertheless, the architect could have avoided missing the budget framework with radically professional conduct.

That is already exactly on our wish list for the architect when he is back from vacation. The two children’s rooms have to be the same size and both get the nice south orientation.

No, leave this architect in the desert. Equally sized children’s rooms are only appreciated by identical twins and otherwise a parental delusion. As the very last thing, you want to find it unbearable not to be shaded when doing homework. Same as before.

We have already started that once in Sweet Home 3D.

Good old analog graph paper remains unbeatable, even if no one wants to hear that.

but also according to 11Ant’s basement rule it sounds rather "sensible" to build without a basement. [...] Is there a rough rule of thumb for how much you would/could enlarge the house because of that?

The proboscidean has nothing to do with ants. The rule of thumb is simply: every sqm of required basement space must be replaced 1:1, and every basement space not required by 0 percent.

We will take a look at Rensch-Haus then. The name put me off somewhat because it reminds me of junk – and since there is so much choice, it wasn’t really in close consideration. Are such smaller carpentry companies really worth a try? I have heard often that they lack experience, and that you therefore build much longer and more mistakes happen. Or also that as a small company they are significantly more expensive.

Rensch-Haus is rather in the league of Weberhaus / Schwörerhaus, and if Luxhaus is already too expensive, it’s wasted time. The manufactories naturally lack the experience their role models have learned in their industrialization process. I would not want them to make up for that on my own home. But more expensive? – no, when adjusted for equipment, rather not. However, they are probably stronger in the eco segment, i.e. among the health food store clientele with the correspondingly different attitude about what is inexpensive than the average consumers.

11ant with us there is a small carpentry that only starts the next house when the current one is finished. It is supposed to be relatively inexpensive and has a very good reputation. Not everyone has ambitions to play a big role, which currently seems to be affordable. I would have priced Luxhaus at Rensch-Haus. The Clou line should not be underestimated in terms of price.

The architect had the soil survey and planned accordingly.

… maybe also because you absolutely want a basement?!

Yes, a basement is obviously expensive on our plot due to poor soil conditions and not really sensible due to little slope.

I'll answer generally: a plan is there to also take a different path again. There are wishes that lead to the dream house, but as a builder, you can also see that requirements make some things impossible. Even if you fixate on a city villa or the hipped roof, there are ways to achieve a beautiful house. I think it is wrong to set yourself in advance and no longer be open to other ways. You can still stick to the hipped roof by generating ancillary rooms with an extension between garage/entrance/house. I do not see a general recommendation for action. The additional square meters for living space in the house or usable space in an extension is individual. I see an office/guest or hobby or a multifunction room inside the thermal envelope, except in the latter case where it involves car repairs or rough material work. By the way, I do not find the first design from the architect and the previous design with SH3D well planned. Therefore, I can only advise to clear your head and the sheet of paper and start anew.