ᐅ Floor plans for a single-family house, approximately 1,500 sq ft (140 m²), without a basement
Created on: 1 Nov 2016 14:14
S
stefanvery
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 439 sqm (4720 sq ft)
Slope: yes, approx. 1.3 m (4 ft) descent across the plot, approx. 0.5 m (1.6 ft) in the house area
Site occupancy index (floor space ratio): 0.35
Floor area ratio (FAR): 0.6
Building window, building line and boundary: see development plan
Border development:
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of storeys: 2
Roof style: any
Architectural style: any
Orientation: southeast or southwest
Maximum height / limits: 10 m (33 ft) above street curb level
Further requirements
Homeowners’ Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: gable roof
Basement, floors: 1.5 floors without basement, approx. 1.25 m (4 ft) knee wall height
Number of occupants, age: 2 adults (32 years + 27 years), children planned
Space requirement on ground floor and upper floor: approx. 130 sqm (1400 sq ft)
Office: family use and home office
Guest sleeping per year: rare
Open or closed layout: closed
Traditional or modern design: mixed
Open kitchen, kitchen island: semi-open to dining room
Number of dining seats: 6
Fireplace: no
Heating: bio-district heating, no own heat generator in the house
Music / stereo wall: yes
Balcony, roof terrace: terraces to southeast and southwest
Garage, carport: 2 carports, 2 parking spaces in front of carport
Utility garden, greenhouse: yes
Other wishes / special features / daily routine: controlled residential ventilation, monolithic wall made of brick or aerated concrete. Due to the lack of a basement, the office and utility room must be located on the ground floor.
Owner’s work: flooring, painting, and installation of controlled residential ventilation
House Design
Who designed it: by us
What do you particularly like?
What do you dislike?
- We don’t find the entrance behind the carport ideal. However, with the rather small plot, there is hardly any alternative. An entrance facing south is not very good, as we want to use the south side for other rooms. If we put the carport completely behind or next to the house, the house moves too much towards the center of the plot, leaving hardly any meaningful garden space in any direction. Suggestions are very welcome here.
- When entering the bathroom, the first thing you see is the shower wall.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: depending on provider, 190,000 to 250,000, including special features, excluding ancillary building costs and materials for owner’s work
Personal budget limit for the house, including fittings: 210,000, including special features, excluding ancillary building costs and materials for owner’s work
Preferred heating technology: district heating available and mandatory
If you had to give up something, which details or extensions?
- Can you do without: actually nothing unnecessary planned
- Cannot do without: n/a
The exterior dimensions (10.24 m x 9.24 m / 33 ft 7 in x 30 ft 4 in) come from a Flair 134 – this provider has so far been by far the most affordable. The dimensions also fit our plot very well. After many other floor plans with different dimensions, we ultimately chose this one.
Basically, we are very satisfied with it; everything seems to be exactly the size we need. Nothing is too big, nothing too small. Of course, bigger would always be nicer.
Our only points of criticism are:
- the shower wall right in front when entering the bathroom
- the house entrance behind the carport. As a passage between the cars, about 1.40 m (4.6 ft) clearance is planned. Beyond that, there is a passage between the house wall and the shed, about 1.70 m (5.6 ft) wide.
What is your opinion on the overall floor plan and these two points of criticism?
Plot size: 439 sqm (4720 sq ft)
Slope: yes, approx. 1.3 m (4 ft) descent across the plot, approx. 0.5 m (1.6 ft) in the house area
Site occupancy index (floor space ratio): 0.35
Floor area ratio (FAR): 0.6
Building window, building line and boundary: see development plan
Border development:
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of storeys: 2
Roof style: any
Architectural style: any
Orientation: southeast or southwest
Maximum height / limits: 10 m (33 ft) above street curb level
Further requirements
Homeowners’ Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: gable roof
Basement, floors: 1.5 floors without basement, approx. 1.25 m (4 ft) knee wall height
Number of occupants, age: 2 adults (32 years + 27 years), children planned
Space requirement on ground floor and upper floor: approx. 130 sqm (1400 sq ft)
Office: family use and home office
Guest sleeping per year: rare
Open or closed layout: closed
Traditional or modern design: mixed
Open kitchen, kitchen island: semi-open to dining room
Number of dining seats: 6
Fireplace: no
Heating: bio-district heating, no own heat generator in the house
Music / stereo wall: yes
Balcony, roof terrace: terraces to southeast and southwest
Garage, carport: 2 carports, 2 parking spaces in front of carport
Utility garden, greenhouse: yes
Other wishes / special features / daily routine: controlled residential ventilation, monolithic wall made of brick or aerated concrete. Due to the lack of a basement, the office and utility room must be located on the ground floor.
Owner’s work: flooring, painting, and installation of controlled residential ventilation
House Design
Who designed it: by us
What do you particularly like?
What do you dislike?
- We don’t find the entrance behind the carport ideal. However, with the rather small plot, there is hardly any alternative. An entrance facing south is not very good, as we want to use the south side for other rooms. If we put the carport completely behind or next to the house, the house moves too much towards the center of the plot, leaving hardly any meaningful garden space in any direction. Suggestions are very welcome here.
- When entering the bathroom, the first thing you see is the shower wall.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: depending on provider, 190,000 to 250,000, including special features, excluding ancillary building costs and materials for owner’s work
Personal budget limit for the house, including fittings: 210,000, including special features, excluding ancillary building costs and materials for owner’s work
Preferred heating technology: district heating available and mandatory
If you had to give up something, which details or extensions?
- Can you do without: actually nothing unnecessary planned
- Cannot do without: n/a
The exterior dimensions (10.24 m x 9.24 m / 33 ft 7 in x 30 ft 4 in) come from a Flair 134 – this provider has so far been by far the most affordable. The dimensions also fit our plot very well. After many other floor plans with different dimensions, we ultimately chose this one.
Basically, we are very satisfied with it; everything seems to be exactly the size we need. Nothing is too big, nothing too small. Of course, bigger would always be nicer.
Our only points of criticism are:
- the shower wall right in front when entering the bathroom
- the house entrance behind the carport. As a passage between the cars, about 1.40 m (4.6 ft) clearance is planned. Beyond that, there is a passage between the house wall and the shed, about 1.70 m (5.6 ft) wide.
What is your opinion on the overall floor plan and these two points of criticism?
S
stefanvery12 Nov 2016 15:03RobsonMKK schrieb:
What happened with the exchange? Like all options, it has both advantages and disadvantages
S
stefanc845 Feb 2017 14:04Hello everyone, I’d like to give you an update.
Our plan is now quite finalized, and we are happy with it. The only thing is that the kitchen could be a bit larger, but the house dimensions don’t allow for that. We don’t want to build any bigger, and we aren’t allowed to either. I also hope it doesn’t feel too exposed since the street is only a few meters (yards) away from the windows. We will probably need some curtains.
Other than that, as I said, we are quite satisfied. Now we just have to decide between the two remaining providers. Stone or wood, that’s the tough question now. Town & Country is currently out of the running—not because of the price, they are still by far the cheapest option. But with local providers, we feel more confident. By the way, wood is clearly the more expensive option in case anyone is wondering.
Best regards
Stefan
Our plan is now quite finalized, and we are happy with it. The only thing is that the kitchen could be a bit larger, but the house dimensions don’t allow for that. We don’t want to build any bigger, and we aren’t allowed to either. I also hope it doesn’t feel too exposed since the street is only a few meters (yards) away from the windows. We will probably need some curtains.
Other than that, as I said, we are quite satisfied. Now we just have to decide between the two remaining providers. Stone or wood, that’s the tough question now. Town & Country is currently out of the running—not because of the price, they are still by far the cheapest option. But with local providers, we feel more confident. By the way, wood is clearly the more expensive option in case anyone is wondering.
Best regards
Stefan
There seems to be a fundamental disagreement between you and your local council: I interpret the plan as specifying the orientation of the house with a gable roof, access from the road on the left side of the plan rather than at the bottom, with the gable facing that road, and the carport at the front left next to the house.
Regarding the home office: I know people for whom "working from home" means sitting with a laptop on the sofa or on the terrace. When the partner no longer wants work stuff left around the living room at dinner time, it gets moved into a small room where you can also store filing cabinets. This little room has a window, so on rainy days you can manage to work there, and it’s convenient for tax purposes, since the tax office wouldn’t recognize a sofa area as a proper home office. If you want to meet clients there, of course a small room isn’t enough. But as a "when Dad sits there, please do not disturb" space, the size as in the first draft is sufficient.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Regarding the home office: I know people for whom "working from home" means sitting with a laptop on the sofa or on the terrace. When the partner no longer wants work stuff left around the living room at dinner time, it gets moved into a small room where you can also store filing cabinets. This little room has a window, so on rainy days you can manage to work there, and it’s convenient for tax purposes, since the tax office wouldn’t recognize a sofa area as a proper home office. If you want to meet clients there, of course a small room isn’t enough. But as a "when Dad sits there, please do not disturb" space, the size as in the first draft is sufficient.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
S
stefanc845 Feb 2017 17:53Thank you for your "support" on the topic of the home office [emoji6]. Honestly, I wouldn’t mind if everyone says it’s too small; it has to suit us. We can’t build bigger, and it’s better than having no space at all for such purposes. It’s sufficient as a quiet retreat with a desk and two cabinets for folders. If it were bigger, based on experience, we would quickly start using it as a storage room, and then I wouldn’t want to work there anymore [emoji6].
Regarding the development plan: I asked the local authorities several times. Their response was that they don’t even look at the application because, first, they don’t mind how we build; we should build it the way we like. And second, they see the architect as responsible for compliance.
About your comments: Rotating the house orientation by 90° is allowed, but we are orienting it as suggested in the development plan. So far, I have always understood the position of the house and carport in the plan as a suggestion. If this is not the case, that would be very interesting news for us. Are you sure about that point, and do you have more information on it?
What also unsettled me is the driveway, which is planned on the left side in the development plan instead of at the bottom. That’s why I asked the building authority twice, each time with a different employee. One said it should be seen more as a recommendation rather than a requirement.
A written quote from the other: “The driveway can also be placed elsewhere, but not in a curve. The junction area of the two streets must definitely be kept clear. If there are no further deviations from the development plan, in our opinion, the construction project can be carried out using the approval exemption procedure. Ultimately, it is up to your planner whether to apply for a permit or not. They bear sole responsibility for this.”
The reason for having the driveway at the bottom is that the terrain on the left side is quite uneven (sloped site), which in my view would make both the construction of a driveway and driving on it more difficult.
I really hope it works out; otherwise, our rather lengthy planning would be in vain.
Regarding the development plan: I asked the local authorities several times. Their response was that they don’t even look at the application because, first, they don’t mind how we build; we should build it the way we like. And second, they see the architect as responsible for compliance.
About your comments: Rotating the house orientation by 90° is allowed, but we are orienting it as suggested in the development plan. So far, I have always understood the position of the house and carport in the plan as a suggestion. If this is not the case, that would be very interesting news for us. Are you sure about that point, and do you have more information on it?
What also unsettled me is the driveway, which is planned on the left side in the development plan instead of at the bottom. That’s why I asked the building authority twice, each time with a different employee. One said it should be seen more as a recommendation rather than a requirement.
A written quote from the other: “The driveway can also be placed elsewhere, but not in a curve. The junction area of the two streets must definitely be kept clear. If there are no further deviations from the development plan, in our opinion, the construction project can be carried out using the approval exemption procedure. Ultimately, it is up to your planner whether to apply for a permit or not. They bear sole responsibility for this.”
The reason for having the driveway at the bottom is that the terrain on the left side is quite uneven (sloped site), which in my view would make both the construction of a driveway and driving on it more difficult.
I really hope it works out; otherwise, our rather lengthy planning would be in vain.
This is a suggestion. There should probably be a building envelope that defines the area of the land which the house including the terrace may occupy. Within this area, the exact positioning would not matter. The driveway, location of the front door, etc. Some zoning plans specify roof ridge directions, others do not. As long as the site coverage ratio and floor area ratio are met, the distances to boundaries are correct, and ridge heights comply, you can build as you like.
S
stefanc845 Feb 2017 18:56The building envelope is defined and has been adhered to. The floor area ratio calculation is included in the plan above and fits just "barely," assuming I haven’t made a mistake. However, I will also ask the two remaining suppliers in the selection for their interpretation and opinion.
Thanks for your input! [emoji106]
Thanks for your input! [emoji106]
Similar topics