Development plan/restrictions – none relevant to us
Plot size – approx. 900m² (9700 sq ft)
Slope – yes
Site coverage ratio – see attachment
Floor area ratio – see attachment
Building envelope, setback line and boundary – see attachment
Edge development – see attachment
Number of parking spaces – see attachment
Number of storeys – see attachment
Roof type – see attachment
Architectural style – see attachment
Orientation – see attachment
Maximum heights/limits – see attachment
Other requirements
For your information:
The plot is located in the second row. Plot 68 is many meters above ours (196).
Direct neighbors are plots 62 and 197.
Access is via plots 192/195 as shown below.
Here is the neighboring development
Client requirements
Architectural style, roof type, building type – villa style
Basement, storeys – no basement, 2 full storeys
Number of occupants, ages – 4 persons, 2 adults, 2 children aged 1 and 3 years
Space requirements on ground and upper floors – total approx. 150-160 m² (1600-1700 sq ft)
Office: family use or home office? – family use
Guest sleepers per year – 10 to 20
Open or closed architecture – not too open, but not too closed either
Conservative or modern design – rather conservative
Open kitchen, island – kitchen and dining room combined as one open space
Number of dining seats – 10
Fireplace – yes
Music/stereo wall – yes
Balcony, roof terrace – no
Garage, carport – garage
Utility garden, greenhouse – no priority, will come later
further wishes/special features/daily routine, including reasons why certain things are desired or avoided
House design
Designed by:
- architect
What do you particularly like? Why?
- At first glance, all room requirements are met
- Open entrance area
- Transition between utility rooms and living spaces
What do you not like? Why?
- Living room in current form, as there is no stereo wall
- Children’s rooms possibly too small due to open space above (wasted space?)
Built-in wardrobe in children’s room 1 possibly to be moved towards the open space and children’s room 2 made square
- Master bedroom is narrow and corridor-like
- Connecting dressing room/bathroom can be removed as unnecessary, allowing more space for wardrobes
- Pantry should be removed in favor of more cabinets, which seems more practical
Price estimate according to architect/planner: no information yet
Personal price limit for the house, including fittings: no price idea yet
Preferred heating technology: geothermal heat pump
If you have to give up something, which details/extensions
- can you give up: fireplace, open space above
- cannot give up: garage, utility rooms as no basement
Why is the design as it is? For example,
Standard draft from planner?
- After first conversation and written wishes
Which requests were implemented by the architect?
A mix of many examples from various magazines...
- Basically all our wishes, just not yet in the optimal final form
What makes it, in your opinion, especially good or bad?
- Individual character
- Large kitchen/dining room as the most used rooms in the house
So now on to the drawings:
Plot size – approx. 900m² (9700 sq ft)
Slope – yes
Site coverage ratio – see attachment
Floor area ratio – see attachment
Building envelope, setback line and boundary – see attachment
Edge development – see attachment
Number of parking spaces – see attachment
Number of storeys – see attachment
Roof type – see attachment
Architectural style – see attachment
Orientation – see attachment
Maximum heights/limits – see attachment
Other requirements
For your information:
The plot is located in the second row. Plot 68 is many meters above ours (196).
Direct neighbors are plots 62 and 197.
Access is via plots 192/195 as shown below.
Here is the neighboring development
Client requirements
Architectural style, roof type, building type – villa style
Basement, storeys – no basement, 2 full storeys
Number of occupants, ages – 4 persons, 2 adults, 2 children aged 1 and 3 years
Space requirements on ground and upper floors – total approx. 150-160 m² (1600-1700 sq ft)
Office: family use or home office? – family use
Guest sleepers per year – 10 to 20
Open or closed architecture – not too open, but not too closed either
Conservative or modern design – rather conservative
Open kitchen, island – kitchen and dining room combined as one open space
Number of dining seats – 10
Fireplace – yes
Music/stereo wall – yes
Balcony, roof terrace – no
Garage, carport – garage
Utility garden, greenhouse – no priority, will come later
further wishes/special features/daily routine, including reasons why certain things are desired or avoided
House design
Designed by:
- architect
What do you particularly like? Why?
- At first glance, all room requirements are met
- Open entrance area
- Transition between utility rooms and living spaces
What do you not like? Why?
- Living room in current form, as there is no stereo wall
- Children’s rooms possibly too small due to open space above (wasted space?)
Built-in wardrobe in children’s room 1 possibly to be moved towards the open space and children’s room 2 made square
- Master bedroom is narrow and corridor-like
- Connecting dressing room/bathroom can be removed as unnecessary, allowing more space for wardrobes
- Pantry should be removed in favor of more cabinets, which seems more practical
Price estimate according to architect/planner: no information yet
Personal price limit for the house, including fittings: no price idea yet
Preferred heating technology: geothermal heat pump
If you have to give up something, which details/extensions
- can you give up: fireplace, open space above
- cannot give up: garage, utility rooms as no basement
Why is the design as it is? For example,
Standard draft from planner?
- After first conversation and written wishes
Which requests were implemented by the architect?
A mix of many examples from various magazines...
- Basically all our wishes, just not yet in the optimal final form
What makes it, in your opinion, especially good or bad?
- Individual character
- Large kitchen/dining room as the most used rooms in the house
So now on to the drawings:
Ah yes, that does clarify some things. On the ground floor, it still "works" to some extent to adapt a specific inspirational design as a starting point. The pantry has to give way, being displaced by the staggered cloakroom. Having the same exterior dimensions but an expanded room layout here leads "only" to competition for space. Upstairs, it becomes even clearer that transferring a gable roof design into the "full knee wall" dimension doesn’t really convince. Since your house already has a completely different style due to this alternative roof, it seems to me that following this "model" is more of a "Pyrrhic victory." What did you like about it—just the room sizes on the ground floor?
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Kwonni schrieb:
Is it not possible for the floor plan of a gable roof house to work in a full upper floor?No, that inevitably creates an excess of space: suddenly, areas that would have only been suitable for vacuuming under a gable roof become fully usable rooms, making the spaces effectively larger. One could respond by making the rooms on the ground floor smaller accordingly: a bit on the left, a bit on the right, but then you end up with unused areas in those freed-up spots. Ironically, in this specific example, this would mean that the pantry displaced on the ground floor would suddenly find room in the attic. But what would you even want to do with it there?
Therefore, it’s wiser to consider a two-story house as a different category than a one-and-a-half-story house and devise a corresponding different mass distribution rather than trying to “transgenically” transfer a floor plan to another house type.
Imagine both floors in cross-section (the full upper floor as a rectangle, and the gable roof floor without knee walls as a triangle): the rectangle, with the same base and height, has double the "floor area." Accordingly, the base area of a full upper floor room "weighs" as more space than the gable roof equivalent.
You need to rebalance the overall space distribution between the ground floor and upper floors, or else someone with size 42 (European shoe size) suddenly gets rooms the size of 46 under their feet.
In terms of this imperfect comparison, you have basically put boots on the house instead of sandals—there really is more to it than just an aesthetic difference.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
That sounds reasonable.
So, we based our design on a villa type and adapted it according to our preferences.
Now everything is square and practical… right?
We are still unsure whether the room on the east side will actually be needed. Our main goal is to be able to enter the garage or the house from the garage without getting wet. The airlock/vestibule needs to be placed somewhere without spoiling the front façade of the house visually.
So, we based our design on a villa type and adapted it according to our preferences.
Now everything is square and practical… right?
We are still unsure whether the room on the east side will actually be needed. Our main goal is to be able to enter the garage or the house from the garage without getting wet. The airlock/vestibule needs to be placed somewhere without spoiling the front façade of the house visually.
Similar topics