ᐅ Single-family house floor plan, slight hillside location, northwest orientation
Created on: 23 May 2025 18:30
K
kronos215
Hello everyone,
We have almost finalized our planning with the architect and would appreciate you taking a critical look at the floor plan. Afterwards, we plan to proceed with the tendering process.
We generally like the ground floor (GF) very much. However, we are considering flipping the house and making some changes to the upper floor (UF). The garage, utility room, and technical room would move to the right, and the entire house would be shifted closer to the neighbor’s hedge on the left side (3m (10 feet) distance). The living room would then be on the left. It’s unclear whether the view of the neighbor’s hedge at a 3m (10 feet) distance will be nicer. On the positive side, the house would be better oriented towards the south and would let in more sunlight. The kitchen would then be on the right, providing wind protection from the open field while still allowing sunlight to reach the terrace.
Corner plot, one neighbor on the left, fields to the back and right
Ground floor area: 99m2 (without terrace), garage 30m2
Upper floor area: 78m2 (from 1.5m (5 feet))
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size
approx. 750m2
Slope
Yes, uphill on the mountain side. There is a manhole cover on the street in front of the plot and one behind it. The elevation difference between the covers is about 3m. The plot initially rises about 1m (3 feet) above the sidewalk and
Edge development
Yes, it’s a corner plot. There is a neighbor on the left side. Behind the house and to the right is a field path and fields.
Number of parking spaces
The adjacent street should provide sufficient parking spaces. A garage is also planned.
Number of stories
According to the development plan, 1.5-story houses are permitted.
Roof type
According to the development plan, only gable roofs are allowed.
Orientation
Northwest
Maximum heights / limits
According to the development plan, the house must be built exactly in this alignment
Requirements of the homeowners
Style, roof shape, building type
Country house style, gable roof (eaves facing the street), single-family home
Basement, number of floors
A basement was initially planned but was dropped due to budget. 1.5 floors are allowed and planned as per the development plan.
Number of occupants, age
Two adults, early 30s, no children yet but a child’s room is planned
Space requirements on GF, UF
GF: Garage, entrance hall, office 1, kitchen, living room, dining room, pantry, technical room, utility room, guest bathroom with shower
UF: Bedroom, child’s room, office 2, bathroom, storage room (planned due to no basement)
Office: family use or home office?
Both offices are currently needed for work.
Overnight guests per year
Very rarely or none
According to the development plan, 1.5-story houses are allowed
Somewhat open
Conservative or modern construction
Modern (?)
Open kitchen, cooking island
Open kitchen planned, cooking island desired but dropped due to space constraints
Number of dining seats
6, preferably expandable to 10
Fireplace
Desired and planned as a partition between dining and living room
Music / stereo wall
Desired; a niche in the living room works well for this
Balcony, roof terrace
Desired but dropped for budget reasons
Garage, carport
Planned; it is questionable whether the garage should instead be located on the right to avoid blocking the south side.
House design
Who is responsible for the design?
Architect
What do you particularly like? Why?
The open living and dining area. The open view of the fields.
The dormer on the upper floor.
What do you dislike? Why?
The corridor on the upper floor feels dark. Many skylights are planned (knee wall 80cm (31 inches) per development plan, gable roof with eaves facing the street).
The ground floor might also be dark. The garage is located on the south side. The windows facing the fields are towards the northeast.
Skylights block the option for photovoltaic panels and the attic space.
The storage room feels out of place.
Since a basement was initially planned, a hobby room was also considered, but this has been dropped.
The master bed is directly adjacent to the child’s room, but the bedroom must remain there.
Price estimate according to architect:
€540,000 (we find this optimistic; we expect higher costs and would thus like to make the floor plan more compact)
Personal price limit for house including fixtures and fittings:
€550,000 (all-in)
Preferred heating technology:
Heat pump
If you had to give up something, which details / expansions
-you could give up: a two-story open space was planned but removed, storage room on the upper floor (is it really necessary?), the GF could generally be smaller to save costs
-you cannot give up: large windows on the GF, open living-dining area, access to the house via garage and utility room, fireplace, pantry
Why has the design turned out this way?E.g.
Which wishes were implemented by the architect? The architect implemented the room concept well and incorporated many of his own ideas that we mostly find coherent.
What do you consider particularly good or bad about it? We like the ground floor very much; there is still potential for changes on the upper floor. We would also like another dormer above the entrance door, but this does not seem possible due to the development plan (the upper floor would become a full story if too much area is covered by dormers). The study could then be where the storage room currently is. The storage room could become a combined storage and hobby room.
We are grateful for any input and suggestions. We are particularly concerned about the south orientation. We do not want the rooms to become too dark.
We have almost finalized our planning with the architect and would appreciate you taking a critical look at the floor plan. Afterwards, we plan to proceed with the tendering process.
We generally like the ground floor (GF) very much. However, we are considering flipping the house and making some changes to the upper floor (UF). The garage, utility room, and technical room would move to the right, and the entire house would be shifted closer to the neighbor’s hedge on the left side (3m (10 feet) distance). The living room would then be on the left. It’s unclear whether the view of the neighbor’s hedge at a 3m (10 feet) distance will be nicer. On the positive side, the house would be better oriented towards the south and would let in more sunlight. The kitchen would then be on the right, providing wind protection from the open field while still allowing sunlight to reach the terrace.
Corner plot, one neighbor on the left, fields to the back and right
Ground floor area: 99m2 (without terrace), garage 30m2
Upper floor area: 78m2 (from 1.5m (5 feet))
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size
approx. 750m2
Slope
Yes, uphill on the mountain side. There is a manhole cover on the street in front of the plot and one behind it. The elevation difference between the covers is about 3m. The plot initially rises about 1m (3 feet) above the sidewalk and
Edge development
Yes, it’s a corner plot. There is a neighbor on the left side. Behind the house and to the right is a field path and fields.
Number of parking spaces
The adjacent street should provide sufficient parking spaces. A garage is also planned.
Number of stories
According to the development plan, 1.5-story houses are permitted.
Roof type
According to the development plan, only gable roofs are allowed.
Orientation
Northwest
Maximum heights / limits
According to the development plan, the house must be built exactly in this alignment
Requirements of the homeowners
Style, roof shape, building type
Country house style, gable roof (eaves facing the street), single-family home
Basement, number of floors
A basement was initially planned but was dropped due to budget. 1.5 floors are allowed and planned as per the development plan.
Number of occupants, age
Two adults, early 30s, no children yet but a child’s room is planned
Space requirements on GF, UF
GF: Garage, entrance hall, office 1, kitchen, living room, dining room, pantry, technical room, utility room, guest bathroom with shower
UF: Bedroom, child’s room, office 2, bathroom, storage room (planned due to no basement)
Office: family use or home office?
Both offices are currently needed for work.
Overnight guests per year
Very rarely or none
According to the development plan, 1.5-story houses are allowed
Somewhat open
Conservative or modern construction
Modern (?)
Open kitchen, cooking island
Open kitchen planned, cooking island desired but dropped due to space constraints
Number of dining seats
6, preferably expandable to 10
Fireplace
Desired and planned as a partition between dining and living room
Music / stereo wall
Desired; a niche in the living room works well for this
Balcony, roof terrace
Desired but dropped for budget reasons
Garage, carport
Planned; it is questionable whether the garage should instead be located on the right to avoid blocking the south side.
House design
Who is responsible for the design?
Architect
What do you particularly like? Why?
The open living and dining area. The open view of the fields.
The dormer on the upper floor.
What do you dislike? Why?
The corridor on the upper floor feels dark. Many skylights are planned (knee wall 80cm (31 inches) per development plan, gable roof with eaves facing the street).
The ground floor might also be dark. The garage is located on the south side. The windows facing the fields are towards the northeast.
Skylights block the option for photovoltaic panels and the attic space.
The storage room feels out of place.
Since a basement was initially planned, a hobby room was also considered, but this has been dropped.
The master bed is directly adjacent to the child’s room, but the bedroom must remain there.
Price estimate according to architect:
€540,000 (we find this optimistic; we expect higher costs and would thus like to make the floor plan more compact)
Personal price limit for house including fixtures and fittings:
€550,000 (all-in)
Preferred heating technology:
Heat pump
If you had to give up something, which details / expansions
-you could give up: a two-story open space was planned but removed, storage room on the upper floor (is it really necessary?), the GF could generally be smaller to save costs
-you cannot give up: large windows on the GF, open living-dining area, access to the house via garage and utility room, fireplace, pantry
Why has the design turned out this way?E.g.
Which wishes were implemented by the architect? The architect implemented the room concept well and incorporated many of his own ideas that we mostly find coherent.
What do you consider particularly good or bad about it? We like the ground floor very much; there is still potential for changes on the upper floor. We would also like another dormer above the entrance door, but this does not seem possible due to the development plan (the upper floor would become a full story if too much area is covered by dormers). The study could then be where the storage room currently is. The storage room could become a combined storage and hobby room.
We are grateful for any input and suggestions. We are particularly concerned about the south orientation. We do not want the rooms to become too dark.
11ant schrieb:
The stone mantra has nothing to do with wall thickness. You also don’t understand anything related to humor or hints.
wiltshire schrieb:
The criticized storage space upstairs will prove to be very valuable. It doesn’t matter at all whether you can stand up in there or not. It doesn’t replace a proper storage room, but is only attic-level space. We have exactly this kind of nook with almost identical heights, and whenever we take out suitcases or look for something, we have to do counter-exercises afterward because our backs hurt so much from bending awkwardly.
wiltshire schrieb:
To be honest, I think this design is one of the better ones seen here in the forum. I will probably agree with that once we know the corresponding attic floors of the ground floor from post #15.
wiltshire schrieb:
Regarding the criticism of the wall dimensions – first, let’s hear what the architect intended. I didn’t read any criticism of the walls; nor did I make any – only that the planner “left without notice” and gave the client no information about which wall thicknesses recommended by the house manufacturer were used. You don’t hire an architect for that lack of communication.
ypg schrieb:
You also don’t understand anything that involves irony or hints. The stone mantra has no bearing—even ironically—on whether walls are roughly sketched rather than presented like a doctoral thesis. It is true that due to my disability I sometimes interpret certain words more strictly than intended, but that has nothing to do with the specific situation. One might have assumed when reading that the rough sketch of the walls would violate the stone mantra, but it does not. If you had meant the paper walls seriously, I probably would have “reproached” that – after all, quotation marks are still allowed here – but even that would not have opposed or ignored the stone mantra.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
K
kronos21524 May 2025 16:30ypg schrieb:
I can’t follow your reasoning... just be glad about the hedge! Ours is 2.50 meters (8 feet) tall, and the neighbor is happy. We were out today, and I visited the site. It is actually about 2 meters (6.5 feet). But that shouldn’t make much of a difference.
ypg schrieb:
Just a rough estimate and at a development stage. Thank you very much for the effort, it’s impressive what is possible. Also the second design. Where would the staircase be located?
11ant schrieb:
... is this from the sample offer of which house manufacturer? 11ant schrieb:
I will probably be able to agree once we know the corresponding upper floors of the ground floor from post #15. Bien-Zenker, correct. For completeness, I am attaching the ground floor and upper floor together in this post. If the floor plan is rotated 90 degrees to the left, it becomes apparent that the ridge orientation no longer conforms to the building permit / planning permission and would need to be changed. Also, the dormer facing the neighbor makes little sense and should be oriented towards the top of the plan. As much as we like the ground floor, there is quite a bit of revision needed for the upper floor.
By the way, this house is listed on various portals – and also at Bien-Zenker itself – for around 416,000 euros turnkey including the foundation slab. Could that be right? It seems too cheap to me. The house offers 161 square meters (1,733 square feet), which comes to about 2,500 euros per square meter (232 dollars per square foot), while Bien-Zenker itself talks about over 3,200 euros per square meter. Apart from that, this shouldn’t be about the company. We have also heard repeatedly that Bien-Zenker is not price-competitive for what they offer.
wiltshire schrieb:
Honestly, I think this design is one of the better ones you see here in the forum. Thank you for your feedback. Are you referring to the original floor plan? Then it apparently does not only receive criticism. We also don’t find the ground floor bad; the kitchen and living room should be arranged toward the garden at the top of the plan. However, this ground floor results in the upper floor that we are struggling with.
K
kronos21524 May 2025 16:38EVOLUTION 161 V2 for €416,000 fully finished, including a master bathroom and KfW 40+ energy standard. Still, any builder should be able to achieve this as a base.
Looking at the floor plan, it might be a good idea to rotate only the ground floor by 90 degrees while keeping the upper floor fixed. Whether a second bathroom upstairs is necessary is also questionable; it could possibly be used as storage again... the knee wall would likely be a bit lower as well.

Looking at the floor plan, it might be a good idea to rotate only the ground floor by 90 degrees while keeping the upper floor fixed. Whether a second bathroom upstairs is necessary is also questionable; it could possibly be used as storage again... the knee wall would likely be a bit lower as well.
W
wiltshire24 May 2025 17:20kronos215 schrieb:
However, this ground floor results in the upper floor, which we find quite challenging.I think the upper floor is well designed overall, though I have a few minor differences in opinion compared to the designer: The standard built-in wardrobes drawn in the bedroom, attempting to create a “walk-in closet,” are, in this layout, pointless. With a custom joinery solution, you can create a lot more storage space and incorporate the sloped ceiling area (even above the bed, if necessary). The space under the roof slope can be turned into a very cozy feature, for example with a very low-profile corner sofa section (these can also be found used in good quality) combined with a floor lamp for reading. A bit of artificial lighting is enough there.
The bathroom works fine. The home office could possibly give some space to the child’s room. I would skip the roof window in the storage room. The roof window over the hallway is nice, but if you want real daylight there, plan for at least twice or even triple the amount of glass area (expensive) and keep in mind that it can be tricky to clean (access). Alternatively, there are fantastic light fixtures that can bring light and life to that area. I’m thinking of something like Less’n’More Alien (very cool) or Bulbsquare (which simulates roof windows). This not only saves some cost but also helps keep the house cooler in summer and frees up more surface area for photovoltaic panels, which would be oriented in that direction.
kronos215 schrieb:
Bien-Zenker, correct. For completeness, I’m attaching the ground floor and upper floor together in this post. Please also add the other attic in post #15.
kronos215 schrieb:
If the floor plan is rotated 90 degrees to the left, you notice that the ridge direction no longer complies with the site development plan and would need to be changed. [ / ] Looking at the floor plan like this, it would probably be best if only the ground floor is rotated 90 degrees while the upper floor stays fixed. Unfortunately, this means the design would have to be abandoned, because the attic no longer works with a rotated roof, and twisting the ground floor and attic against each other—even though the staircase is quite central here—is also problematic (apart from the fact that then you only keep the price dimension of the catalog model, but lose the advantage of its serial maturity).
kronos215 schrieb:
But any construction company should be able to manage that as a starting point. The construction company you mean is actually the general contractor. And no, they won’t be able to manage this, at best something similarly priced. But a key advantage of the catalog model—beyond having a “checked” calculation at hand—is the technical serial maturity of the design. And the team from company Y simply has no routine with the product of company X. Therefore, it is neither accurate nor advisable to try to recreate a specific floor plan and price-matching house “under a different letterhead.” Different provider, different catalog—no cross-transfers work there.
kronos215 schrieb:
By the way, the house is listed on various portals [...] More important is that it is built exactly as in the catalog and in the showroom, so you can actually walk through it with a tape measure.
kronos215 schrieb:
We have also often heard that Bien-Zenker is not competitively priced for what is offered. I wouldn’t put it that way. Bien-Zenker is quite competitively priced for its clientele, it’s just that their clientele is not comparable to you in terms of budget sensitivity. Bien-Zenker builds for full-time dual earners, where at least one holds a university degree and has a company car allowance (not extravagant, something like a BMW 3 Series or Audi A4). Business administration types with glossy nails. Take a close look at the brochures—all manufacturers’ marketing materials are very revealing: the models shown tend to closely match the provider’s target customer profile. The more similar the people in the photos are to you and roughly eighty percent of your social circle, the more likely the manufacturer fits your needs (including pricing). People who wear a Polo shirt and people who drive a Polo car have different income levels; and the difference is even greater between those who wear a Polo shirt first-hand and those who wear second-hand.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Similar topics