ᐅ Single-story house with a hip roof – is converting the attic worthwhile?
Created on: 22 Apr 2017 00:05
J
jawkneeHello everyone,
I am currently looking for a plot of land and plan to build a small single-family house of about 120 sqm (1,292 sq ft), without a basement. I am thinking of a classic house with a pitched roof, including a utility room, kitchen, guest toilet, and living/dining area on the ground floor, and bedrooms, bathroom, and guest room/office upstairs.
Since I want to discuss specific details with builders or architects only once I have a plot as a basis, I cannot provide more detailed information at this stage. I hope this is sufficient for now.
I have now found a suitable plot (about 700 sqm (7,535 sq ft)), which will be developed next year, and according to the zoning plan, everything seemed fine. However, after asking the real estate agent for more information, it turned out there was a change to the development plan.
Previously, the following was allowed:
Ground floor + upper floor, pitched roof, 35–45 degrees, knee wall 80 cm (31 inches)
Now, only the following is permitted:
Ground floor + upper floor, hipped roof, 20–35 degrees, knee wall 80 cm (31 inches)
The floor area ratio (0.8) and site coverage ratio (0.4) have not changed.
According to the description and the agent’s statement, this would be a classic bungalow. Although I don’t completely rule it out, I am not a 100% fan of bungalows because, based on my preferences, I would like to have the bedroom and bathroom upstairs, and a bungalow also tends to use more of the plot area.
However, it seems that there are bungalows with usable attic space. My question is whether it is practical to manage about 120 sqm (1,292 sq ft) with a knee wall of 80 cm (31 inches) to fit a bathroom and bedroom in the roof space... and you would also need to accommodate a staircase. From a gut feeling, I find it hard to imagine, but maybe one of the experts here can share their assessment. It would also be interesting to know if it makes economic sense at all.
Thank you very much in advance.
I am currently looking for a plot of land and plan to build a small single-family house of about 120 sqm (1,292 sq ft), without a basement. I am thinking of a classic house with a pitched roof, including a utility room, kitchen, guest toilet, and living/dining area on the ground floor, and bedrooms, bathroom, and guest room/office upstairs.
Since I want to discuss specific details with builders or architects only once I have a plot as a basis, I cannot provide more detailed information at this stage. I hope this is sufficient for now.
I have now found a suitable plot (about 700 sqm (7,535 sq ft)), which will be developed next year, and according to the zoning plan, everything seemed fine. However, after asking the real estate agent for more information, it turned out there was a change to the development plan.
Previously, the following was allowed:
Ground floor + upper floor, pitched roof, 35–45 degrees, knee wall 80 cm (31 inches)
Now, only the following is permitted:
Ground floor + upper floor, hipped roof, 20–35 degrees, knee wall 80 cm (31 inches)
The floor area ratio (0.8) and site coverage ratio (0.4) have not changed.
According to the description and the agent’s statement, this would be a classic bungalow. Although I don’t completely rule it out, I am not a 100% fan of bungalows because, based on my preferences, I would like to have the bedroom and bathroom upstairs, and a bungalow also tends to use more of the plot area.
However, it seems that there are bungalows with usable attic space. My question is whether it is practical to manage about 120 sqm (1,292 sq ft) with a knee wall of 80 cm (31 inches) to fit a bathroom and bedroom in the roof space... and you would also need to accommodate a staircase. From a gut feeling, I find it hard to imagine, but maybe one of the experts here can share their assessment. It would also be interesting to know if it makes economic sense at all.
Thank you very much in advance.
I agree with that. 700 m² (7,535 sq ft) multiplied by a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.4 already results in more than the desired 120 m² (1,292 sq ft). You can easily fit bedrooms, bathrooms (and more) into an attic with a 35° pitch and an 80 cm (31.5 inch) knee wall.
This is—despite some building plans seeming somewhat arbitrary—a relatively comfortable situation; others have to deal with absurdly low 30 cm (11.8 inch) knee walls combined with floor area ratios of 0.2/0.4 and 500 m² (5,382 sq ft).
The requirement for a hipped roof seems quite pointless to me—is that a confirmed rule?
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
This is—despite some building plans seeming somewhat arbitrary—a relatively comfortable situation; others have to deal with absurdly low 30 cm (11.8 inch) knee walls combined with floor area ratios of 0.2/0.4 and 500 m² (5,382 sq ft).
The requirement for a hipped roof seems quite pointless to me—is that a confirmed rule?
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Thanks in advance for the responses.
I was a bit concerned since the house won’t be very large overall, that the many sloped ceilings might limit the amount of usable space. With a gable roof, at least you only have slopes on two sides. I still find it a bit hard to visualize, as I’m not yet very familiar with the dimensions in general. But I’m glad to hear you consider it unproblematic.
Will it be somewhat more expensive financially than a classic gable roof? Due to a) the somewhat larger foundation slab, more roofing, and possibly additional dormers to reduce the impact of the slopes?
I haven’t seen such a development plan during my search either, but I guess it’s already decided. The real estate agent specifically sent me the amendment to the development plan for this. I will also ask the municipality directly about it, including what flexibility might still be available.
The development plan covers a complete new residential area, which will be partially developed now and the rest (where my preferred plot is) next year. Different sections were grouped based on Tuscan-style houses, bungalows, and gable roofs. Unfortunately, there wasn’t a plot with a gable roof that really appealed to me, and Tuscan-style houses are not really my preference either (although I still plan to ask how strict the definition of Tuscan-style house is supposed to be, as the plan specifies E+1+D with a hipped roof).
If the bungalow option turns out to be an issue, I would have to either accept a different building style or a different plot and continue looking.
I was a bit concerned since the house won’t be very large overall, that the many sloped ceilings might limit the amount of usable space. With a gable roof, at least you only have slopes on two sides. I still find it a bit hard to visualize, as I’m not yet very familiar with the dimensions in general. But I’m glad to hear you consider it unproblematic.
Will it be somewhat more expensive financially than a classic gable roof? Due to a) the somewhat larger foundation slab, more roofing, and possibly additional dormers to reduce the impact of the slopes?
I haven’t seen such a development plan during my search either, but I guess it’s already decided. The real estate agent specifically sent me the amendment to the development plan for this. I will also ask the municipality directly about it, including what flexibility might still be available.
The development plan covers a complete new residential area, which will be partially developed now and the rest (where my preferred plot is) next year. Different sections were grouped based on Tuscan-style houses, bungalows, and gable roofs. Unfortunately, there wasn’t a plot with a gable roof that really appealed to me, and Tuscan-style houses are not really my preference either (although I still plan to ask how strict the definition of Tuscan-style house is supposed to be, as the plan specifies E+1+D with a hipped roof).
If the bungalow option turns out to be an issue, I would have to either accept a different building style or a different plot and continue looking.
Yes, yes, I know these design constraints: we wanted a bungalow but had to build upwards.
If I had been active in the forum back then and had more time to plan, I would now have a way to combine both.
Upstairs in your case, the sloped ceilings can be well used as built-in closets, so your living space has straight walls except for the window walls in the slope. That also has its advantages.
Best regards in short
If I had been active in the forum back then and had more time to plan, I would now have a way to combine both.
Upstairs in your case, the sloped ceilings can be well used as built-in closets, so your living space has straight walls except for the window walls in the slope. That also has its advantages.
Best regards in short
We are building a bungalow with a hipped roof. The roof pitch is 35 degrees, and the foundation slab is 133 sq. meters (1,432 sq. feet), measuring 10 by 13.30 meters (33 by 44 feet). However, we are using 45-degree slopes for the hipped ends. The roof will be constructed as a studio truss, providing excellent potential for expansion upstairs with about 50 usable sq. meters (540 sq. feet).
Similar topics