Hello everyone!
We have now had several meetings with our architect and are unfortunately quite dissatisfied with the designs. These are the 5th drafts and still far from what we envision.
Here are the designs for now.
I am particularly bothered by the awkwardly shaped rooms. According to the architect, this is necessary due to the structural requirements of the urban villa...
We have now had several meetings with our architect and are unfortunately quite dissatisfied with the designs. These are the 5th drafts and still far from what we envision.
Here are the designs for now.
I am particularly bothered by the awkwardly shaped rooms. According to the architect, this is necessary due to the structural requirements of the urban villa...
We have about 2.10 m (7 feet) of elevation difference from the street to the back edge of the house. That’s quite significant. The garden behind continues to slope gently upward, but we are not insisting on having a completely level garden.
The neighbors have their slopes either beside the house or from the street down to the garden. It’s hard for us to get a clear idea. Those whose properties slope to the side usually have retaining walls to hold back the soil, while others have built up terraces. At least from the outside, you can’t really tell if they’ve made many structural changes to their houses.
The neighbors have their slopes either beside the house or from the street down to the garden. It’s hard for us to get a clear idea. Those whose properties slope to the side usually have retaining walls to hold back the soil, while others have built up terraces. At least from the outside, you can’t really tell if they’ve made many structural changes to their houses.
I actually like the sloped site in the outdoor area. I like the stepped terrace and the surrounding wall. I think all of this makes the garden feel very cozy, somewhat tucked in.
I'm not quite sure why the architect keeps dismissing it. He once argued that the landscaping would become very expensive, but we are willing to accept that. Or is the height difference just too large for it?
I'm not quite sure why the architect keeps dismissing it. He once argued that the landscaping would become very expensive, but we are willing to accept that. Or is the height difference just too large for it?
Linda85 schrieb:
I actually like the sloping site in the outdoor area. I like the terraced patio, and I like having a continuous wall. I think all of this makes the garden feel very cozy, a bit nestled in.
I’m not quite sure why the architect always seemed to reject that. He once argued that the landscaping would become extremely expensive, but we’re willing to accept that. Or is the height difference just too big for it?I don’t see the problem here. The average terrain slope is shown, and the idea in the design is to terrace the site. To what extent you put steps and how high they are can still be adjusted. I have seen several plots where there is a staircase from the back garden up to a plateau, which can be nicely landscaped.
In this respect, the architect has responded to your needs.
I also think you like the exterior views. At least, they should appeal to anyone who likes urban villas.
Regarding the floor plan: I like split-level designs, but Alex’s arguments are very understandable. You didn’t want it anyway. I find the idea of the integrated landing staircase very nice, and I can also imagine the light and openness of the “stairwell” as very generous and airy.
I don’t find the recesses or projections too extreme or disturbing either; they won’t even be noticeable once lived in. On the contrary, you’ll actually have some advantages: protected sleeping areas, a built-in pre-wall in the guest bathroom, a niche in the living room where you can nicely arrange either the TV wall or the sofa so it doesn’t feel bulky.
This allows you to incorporate elements from wall to wall. In the kids’ rooms, for example, the niches are great for a loft bed or later for a built-in wardrobe.
I specifically planned these recesses in our upper floor so you can attach a shelf above the 2-meter (6.6 feet) width from wall to wall for baskets, boxes, or a row of books as storage. You can also accentuate the recessed walls nicely with paint or stone. This looks better than a wall with a sharp corner joining it.
In the bathroom, the switch panel can be installed near the door without damaging any tiled wall.
The only part that needs revision is the kitchen/hall area: I have an idea and will sketch it tonight.
I’m also not too thrilled by the garden facade as it looks too uniform for me, but that’s a matter of taste...
So I really don’t understand the claim that the architect planned it poorly.
Best regards in brief
The Entrance.
... in my proposal would be roughly at the current location and similarly positioned height-wise, between the basement/garage floor and street level. The garage would be about 40 cm (16 inches) lower (-1.65 instead of -1.25), the basement floor at -1.25, corresponding to the ground floor level (street side) at +1.60. Split level doesn’t have to be done with equal half flights of stairs. +1.06 would be a suitable level for a terrace close to the terrain slope and the garden-side ground floor, resulting from dividing the stairs into 13+3 instead of 8+8 risers (each approx. 17.81 cm (7 inches) with a floor-to-ceiling height of 2.85 m (9.35 feet)). I probably need to work this out in more detail; otherwise, the house might end up too high. I will take another look at the local development plan / building permit requirements.
I don’t see it rejected in this VE5, rather extensively implemented; and yes, in my opinion with considerable costs for terrain modeling. Please show VE1 for comparison.
Split Level.
... had its peak popularity among architectural intellectuals roughly between 1978 and 1983, and certainly not without reason is it not widely in fashion today. Personal taste (and practical reasons against internal stairs) are one thing — but on the other hand, in my view, there are levels of slope intensity where ignoring the topography is hardly an option. The plot practically "builds with you," and in that sense, you can only build "against the land" to a limited extent.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
... in my proposal would be roughly at the current location and similarly positioned height-wise, between the basement/garage floor and street level. The garage would be about 40 cm (16 inches) lower (-1.65 instead of -1.25), the basement floor at -1.25, corresponding to the ground floor level (street side) at +1.60. Split level doesn’t have to be done with equal half flights of stairs. +1.06 would be a suitable level for a terrace close to the terrain slope and the garden-side ground floor, resulting from dividing the stairs into 13+3 instead of 8+8 risers (each approx. 17.81 cm (7 inches) with a floor-to-ceiling height of 2.85 m (9.35 feet)). I probably need to work this out in more detail; otherwise, the house might end up too high. I will take another look at the local development plan / building permit requirements.
Linda85 schrieb:
I’m not quite sure why the architect always pretty much rejected that. He once argued that the exterior landscaping would become insanely expensive, but we are willing to accept that. Or is the height difference simply too large for it?
I don’t see it rejected in this VE5, rather extensively implemented; and yes, in my opinion with considerable costs for terrain modeling. Please show VE1 for comparison.
Split Level.
... had its peak popularity among architectural intellectuals roughly between 1978 and 1983, and certainly not without reason is it not widely in fashion today. Personal taste (and practical reasons against internal stairs) are one thing — but on the other hand, in my view, there are levels of slope intensity where ignoring the topography is hardly an option. The plot practically "builds with you," and in that sense, you can only build "against the land" to a limited extent.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
In the meantime, I have reviewed the development plan (not directly from the local authority, as it can only be ordered for forty euros; so I made do with your plan photos).
In terms of height, the ground floor level should be no higher than "-0.66" and likely requires an exception for the planned position; my proposal regarding the garden-adjusted height does not seem compatible with this. The eaves height requirement of 4.50 m (= "+2.84") probably doesn’t allow for adjustments either.
A storage space requirement of 5.50 m in front of the garage prevents my suggestion to orient the garage toward the street—unless it is shifted to the left side of the plan and accessed from the right instead of the lower street side. However, this would place it at a higher elevation, which would interfere with my plan to have a better view over it.
An entrance from the right side of the plan, which I find more appealing due to better height alignment, would mean a long route from the garage to the house—unless the rear garage door is used regularly or the garage enclosure is omitted in favor of a carport.
The roof pitch is required to be at least 30°. The limitation on the offset in the shed roof would still allow for a split-level design, but overall, the height restrictions argue against it (or else necessitate a one-and-a-half-story design).
Alright. Since you like the stepped terrace design, there is no need to go to great lengths to make it obsolete. I would have preferred significantly altered elevations, as I believe most changes there would have improved the design. Stylistically, I think the house might not be suitable for those who dislike folk-style architecture—but the photos of the neighboring houses on the local authority’s website clearly show that it fits in. Nevertheless, I find it worth changing how similar the window formats and placements are between the ground floor and upper floor. Usually, I am the first and loudest advocate for planners not creating too mixed a "window salad." In this case, however, I find the strict uniformity excessive, especially as the matches between upper and lower floors give it a semi-detached house appeal.
I am actually only really "unhappy" with the skylight in the guest bathroom.
In summary: the planned height positions are acceptable if you like the terrace as is (or would only require elaborate efforts to improve). Moving the entrance to the right side of the plan (along with the possibility of bringing the house closer to that street / making it "wider" and possibly even allowing for a non-straight but longitudinal (also ridge-parallel) staircase) could offer a breakthrough for the floor plan. But even if you stick to this basic form (which I take neutrally) and keep the valley-side entrance (which I find less favorable), the floor plan can still be executed without the awkward box frame made of load-bearing walls around the hallway. It can definitely be done more elegantly. As I said, compare it to VE1. If I understand correctly, this VE5 incorporates most of your ideas (except for that hallway box) but from the architect’s perspective (which I share), it involves the greatest amount of terrain modeling work.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
In terms of height, the ground floor level should be no higher than "-0.66" and likely requires an exception for the planned position; my proposal regarding the garden-adjusted height does not seem compatible with this. The eaves height requirement of 4.50 m (= "+2.84") probably doesn’t allow for adjustments either.
A storage space requirement of 5.50 m in front of the garage prevents my suggestion to orient the garage toward the street—unless it is shifted to the left side of the plan and accessed from the right instead of the lower street side. However, this would place it at a higher elevation, which would interfere with my plan to have a better view over it.
An entrance from the right side of the plan, which I find more appealing due to better height alignment, would mean a long route from the garage to the house—unless the rear garage door is used regularly or the garage enclosure is omitted in favor of a carport.
The roof pitch is required to be at least 30°. The limitation on the offset in the shed roof would still allow for a split-level design, but overall, the height restrictions argue against it (or else necessitate a one-and-a-half-story design).
Alright. Since you like the stepped terrace design, there is no need to go to great lengths to make it obsolete. I would have preferred significantly altered elevations, as I believe most changes there would have improved the design. Stylistically, I think the house might not be suitable for those who dislike folk-style architecture—but the photos of the neighboring houses on the local authority’s website clearly show that it fits in. Nevertheless, I find it worth changing how similar the window formats and placements are between the ground floor and upper floor. Usually, I am the first and loudest advocate for planners not creating too mixed a "window salad." In this case, however, I find the strict uniformity excessive, especially as the matches between upper and lower floors give it a semi-detached house appeal.
I am actually only really "unhappy" with the skylight in the guest bathroom.
In summary: the planned height positions are acceptable if you like the terrace as is (or would only require elaborate efforts to improve). Moving the entrance to the right side of the plan (along with the possibility of bringing the house closer to that street / making it "wider" and possibly even allowing for a non-straight but longitudinal (also ridge-parallel) staircase) could offer a breakthrough for the floor plan. But even if you stick to this basic form (which I take neutrally) and keep the valley-side entrance (which I find less favorable), the floor plan can still be executed without the awkward box frame made of load-bearing walls around the hallway. It can definitely be done more elegantly. As I said, compare it to VE1. If I understand correctly, this VE5 incorporates most of your ideas (except for that hallway box) but from the architect’s perspective (which I share), it involves the greatest amount of terrain modeling work.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Similar topics