What is feasible on the existing property and budget

Addition to the warning about the garage flooding during heavy rain: this point also worries us. However, I imagine finding a solution for it. The driveway wouldn't have to be fully paved after all. There are no everyday vehicles in there that come and go daily. A narrow driveway would be sufficient here. Maybe even grass pavers laid only as tire tracks. Or am I maybe imagining this too simply again?


Edit to the post above:
1. I shifted your height suggestion by half a meter. That's what happens when you answer quickly... consider the correction to 209.5 for your suggestion. But we would still be 1m below our planned basement height.
2. I confused the mentioned roof slope phobia with skylights. But my attitude is similar. We live in an attic with knee walls of 1.20-1.30 and 1m. So we know what we're talking about. I basically like the slope for the feeling of space, provided you're not dependent on the double casement window and the room is large enough for furniture placement.

I am glad that you do not have the roof slope phobia to the extent I feared: currently, the unrealistic expectation among home builders (also in other forums) is to have standing height and clearance right into every last corner on every paid square meter.

On a slope, it is almost impossible without some sympathy for pitched roofs if the house is to be reasonably pleasingly placed in the landscape; and being able to let your gaze wander over the ridge of the neighboring valley requires a certain roof pitch, because otherwise the view gets stuck on their eaves. The greater the delta between roof pitch and slope incline (with the slope incline being the larger value), the stronger this "effect" becomes.

As far as I’m concerned, you can make your ground floor floor level 210 instead of 209.5, but I rather don’t see it at 210.5 (although I have a good spatial imagination, but if I can compare it to a concrete plan of yours, my opinion might vary slightly).

I still advise you to be frugal with every single centimeter of modeling and especially not to underestimate their domino effect ( : can you please check if the Google Earth image of your street is recent enough to already see the alarming area consumption of the L-stone cascades?).

At least the embankment of your fills towards the neighboring valley would drain into it, which it must not.

By the rain remark about the garage, I meant: for roof terrace use, it would have to lie a whole floor below the ground floor. Lowering the garage doesn’t allow that: if it came below the current ground level, water flowing down the slope would be diverted into the driveway, then you’d have to put a gigantic cistern under the bird gutter in front of the gate. So I see your garage floor better laid so that it is even slightly higher when projected from the uphill gate edge onto the street. If you want to look over the garage, however, even 210.5 for the ground floor might be barely enough (the house height limit would probably allow it, but there would be embankments, and your wish for a garden without harsh height breaks would be hardly achievable). But let me stress “hardly” and not “not” — by now you should probably get what I meant about the architect who has to be a fox (cunning dog).

The rules for terrain modeling are probably best known here by , and currently has the freshest own experience (but also the equally fresh sticker shock). In my assessment, the state building code will be sufficiently clear so that no federal law (or even case law) will have to fill the gap.

However, I advise you to direct your call to the contributors most loudly towards suggestions for other building positionings.

I consider the idea of self-blood donation regarding the excavation good — but keep in mind that a) the volume cannot be rebuilt one-to-one and b) the movement “costs” as well.

You cannot compare the older basement apartments with modern ones. The older ones are much more like "cellars." I myself lived for years in a basement apartment built in 1984.

The garden can be laid out and divided into several areas.

Grilling/eating preferably near the kitchen
Playing rather in the shade
Pool rather in the south

Something like this ? From the L-shaped stone corner in the first picture to the street above, it is 3.05m. We are still about 50cm below street level with the left rear corner (when looking up from below) of the house.

Something like this ?

Thanks, but I meant: to show in the aerial view how much garden area is used for that, smoothing out terrain modifications or turning them into steps. 1:1.5 means: one meter of height correction requires a one and a half meter wide strip just for the slope; the drainage, which then still needs to be arranged in front of the boundary, is not included. It's not just the money it costs - the height modeling also eats up space.

Somehow almost everything is sloped, except for a 4-6m grass area, and even that has a 20-30cm gradient over the 4-6m