Hello fellow building enthusiasts,
We recently purchased two plots of land where a small new residential area (11 single-family homes) is being developed. We are planning to build a townhouse with a living space of about 160 sqm (1,722 sq ft).
You might be wondering why two plots... One parcel was too small for a detached single-family home, so we bought two because we wanted a bit more space in the garden.
One parcel measures 305 sqm (3,284 sq ft) and the other 267 sqm (2,875 sq ft). Together we have 572 sqm (6,159 sq ft) (parcels 1654 and 1656). Including access paths, the total area is 622 sqm (6,695 sq ft). The plots are approximately 19 meters (62 feet) deep and 30 meters (98 feet) wide.
Now to our questions:
How can we position the house most advantageously on the plots?
The driveway access to the houses is planned from the Southwest street (plot 1652). The street there is 4.5 meters (15 feet) wide. On the Northeast side, a 2-meter (6.5 feet) wide pedestrian walkway is planned.
The blue line in the drawing marks the building boundary. There is no need to maintain a 3-meter (10 feet) setback from the pedestrian walkway; 1.5 to 2 meters (5 to 6.5 feet) are sufficient here. I think the most favorable placement would be to position the house in the Northeast corner with the main entrance facing the pedestrian walkway, so we could have the entire garden on the Southwest side.
How can the garage be positioned conveniently in this layout?
I think the garage would make most sense placed along the boundary of the neighboring plot 1653.
I have sketched four different options that we have considered.
Option 1:
If we place the garage directly attached to the house, we would have to enter the house through the back door of the garage every time, and there would only be space for one parking spot in front of the garage, which is not ideal for two cars.
Option 2:
A garage positioned with some distance from the house. This would allow space for a second parking spot. However, with this option, we would need to fence off the garden area near the parking spots to prevent direct views into the garden. We would also be losing a lot of usable space and would have to pave the path leading to the front and the area in front of the house and garage.
Option 3:
Similar to option 2, but with the fencing arranged differently. The garden area next to the garage could still be used as garden space, but we would have to go through the garden gate every time from the garage to reach the house entrance.
In all three options, the pathways to the house entrance are quite long.
Additionally, I have never seen a garage positioned with its back wall facing the side of the house entrance. Usually, the garage door faces the side of the house entrance, or the house entrance is placed on the side adjacent to the garage.
Option 4:
The option we like best is access to the garage via the pedestrian walkway. The walkway was originally planned as a footpath and will be paved 2 meters (6.5 feet) wide during site development. We could widen it by about 1 meter (3 feet), making it a 3-meter (10 feet) wide driveway/walkway that could be used to drive into the garage. We would need to pave that additional meter ourselves and shift the house one meter (3 feet) further, which would not be a problem given the size of the plot. According to the development plan and information from the city, this would be perfectly allowed. We have pedestrian, vehicle access, and utility easements benefiting the residents for this walkway. With this option, we could place the garage directly attached to the house and use the second parking spot in front of the utility room window.
Options 1 to 3 might be possible if the house entrance is placed on the garage side, but then I’m not sure how we would need to change the floor plan.
How would you position the house and garage? Maybe you can help us with some new ideas to move forward.
We recently purchased two plots of land where a small new residential area (11 single-family homes) is being developed. We are planning to build a townhouse with a living space of about 160 sqm (1,722 sq ft).
You might be wondering why two plots... One parcel was too small for a detached single-family home, so we bought two because we wanted a bit more space in the garden.
One parcel measures 305 sqm (3,284 sq ft) and the other 267 sqm (2,875 sq ft). Together we have 572 sqm (6,159 sq ft) (parcels 1654 and 1656). Including access paths, the total area is 622 sqm (6,695 sq ft). The plots are approximately 19 meters (62 feet) deep and 30 meters (98 feet) wide.
Now to our questions:
How can we position the house most advantageously on the plots?
The driveway access to the houses is planned from the Southwest street (plot 1652). The street there is 4.5 meters (15 feet) wide. On the Northeast side, a 2-meter (6.5 feet) wide pedestrian walkway is planned.
The blue line in the drawing marks the building boundary. There is no need to maintain a 3-meter (10 feet) setback from the pedestrian walkway; 1.5 to 2 meters (5 to 6.5 feet) are sufficient here. I think the most favorable placement would be to position the house in the Northeast corner with the main entrance facing the pedestrian walkway, so we could have the entire garden on the Southwest side.
How can the garage be positioned conveniently in this layout?
I think the garage would make most sense placed along the boundary of the neighboring plot 1653.
I have sketched four different options that we have considered.
Option 1:
If we place the garage directly attached to the house, we would have to enter the house through the back door of the garage every time, and there would only be space for one parking spot in front of the garage, which is not ideal for two cars.
Option 2:
A garage positioned with some distance from the house. This would allow space for a second parking spot. However, with this option, we would need to fence off the garden area near the parking spots to prevent direct views into the garden. We would also be losing a lot of usable space and would have to pave the path leading to the front and the area in front of the house and garage.
Option 3:
Similar to option 2, but with the fencing arranged differently. The garden area next to the garage could still be used as garden space, but we would have to go through the garden gate every time from the garage to reach the house entrance.
In all three options, the pathways to the house entrance are quite long.
Additionally, I have never seen a garage positioned with its back wall facing the side of the house entrance. Usually, the garage door faces the side of the house entrance, or the house entrance is placed on the side adjacent to the garage.
Option 4:
The option we like best is access to the garage via the pedestrian walkway. The walkway was originally planned as a footpath and will be paved 2 meters (6.5 feet) wide during site development. We could widen it by about 1 meter (3 feet), making it a 3-meter (10 feet) wide driveway/walkway that could be used to drive into the garage. We would need to pave that additional meter ourselves and shift the house one meter (3 feet) further, which would not be a problem given the size of the plot. According to the development plan and information from the city, this would be perfectly allowed. We have pedestrian, vehicle access, and utility easements benefiting the residents for this walkway. With this option, we could place the garage directly attached to the house and use the second parking spot in front of the utility room window.
Options 1 to 3 might be possible if the house entrance is placed on the garage side, but then I’m not sure how we would need to change the floor plan.
How would you position the house and garage? Maybe you can help us with some new ideas to move forward.
pp1203 schrieb:
How would you place the house and the garage? Maybe you can help us a bit and give us new ideas to move forward. If you save the readers from having to mentally rotate the layout by drawing the different options directly on the site plan, a larger group of people might be able to help.
Personally, I would first keep the driveway short and prefer exiting onto a quiet street rather than a busier one, while keeping access routes free for emergency, furniture, or garbage trucks as well as playing children. Secondly, I consider walkways between the house and garage as useful as direct access from the house into the garage to be unnecessary.
But that is just my view on the basic question of the arrangement of house, garage, and driveway; for the further question of the best house placement regarding sun exposure and the garden, as I said, I find it clearer if we can discuss it at full scale and don’t have to mentally rotate the image by about 130°.
[written almost simultaneously with kaho674]
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
pp1203 schrieb:
1655 is the garbage bin storage area, just like 1657... and some others that can’t be seen in the picture.
Eichenforst Street ends at Pöhler (no through road). It only serves as access to all the houses in the development. The garbage truck comes every one or two weeks, only drives along the public road (Eichenforst), collects the trash, and opens Pöhler for passage on those days. The private roads are not driven on. The bins are then to be placed there by all parties. Otherwise, as usual, everyone puts them out in front of their own house.
I don’t quite understand your suggestion. Facing west? According to the plan, our terrace would be there (in front of the bay window of the house), and then the terrace and garden would be open to the street? If you mean something else, could you please sketch it briefly in Paint? I’m not doing anything with Paint [emoji2] The drawing is attached.
With your plan, you can only orient yourself by the path and the road. So you are rotating your drawing... (for you, the path is in the south instead of the north!?) and (not just) for me your garage is in the west [emoji848]
I created a sketch to show our idea. With this layout, we would have the terrace on the west side and partially on the south side, and the entire garden area (lawn) on the south side. Parking space No. 1 would be in front of the garage, and parking space No. 2 next to it. The proportions are not accurate, but I just want to illustrate our idea.
In the version proposed by kaho674 and the general idea of placing the house exactly on the other side, we would have the large garden area and terrace on the west side. Wouldn't this block the entire south side with the house? The house would also cast a shadow over the garden area. I don’t understand the purpose of this variant.
A few general comments about the streets:
The new development area is located in a residential neighborhood between two streets. Eichenforst street is designed only as a through road to access the new houses. Since Pöhler street ends at a dead end, no cars will pass through there. With a total of 11 single-family homes, there will be very little traffic—only residents and visitors. Our plots are in the third row out of four, so even the houses in the first two rows won’t have to drive very far.
We have never built before and therefore don’t have much experience. Perhaps we’re making a wrong assumption, but logically, our version seems the most practical.
PS: Attached is a larger plan from the land seller, who will also be responsible for the development work. In his drawing, the houses are also placed in the corner as we propose, with the main entrance on the side of the pathway. Originally, though, two houses were planned on our plots.
In the version proposed by kaho674 and the general idea of placing the house exactly on the other side, we would have the large garden area and terrace on the west side. Wouldn't this block the entire south side with the house? The house would also cast a shadow over the garden area. I don’t understand the purpose of this variant.
A few general comments about the streets:
The new development area is located in a residential neighborhood between two streets. Eichenforst street is designed only as a through road to access the new houses. Since Pöhler street ends at a dead end, no cars will pass through there. With a total of 11 single-family homes, there will be very little traffic—only residents and visitors. Our plots are in the third row out of four, so even the houses in the first two rows won’t have to drive very far.
We have never built before and therefore don’t have much experience. Perhaps we’re making a wrong assumption, but logically, our version seems the most practical.
PS: Attached is a larger plan from the land seller, who will also be responsible for the development work. In his drawing, the houses are also placed in the corner as we propose, with the main entrance on the side of the pathway. Originally, though, two houses were planned on our plots.
The main idea is to shield the garden from the main street using the house. No one could have guessed that it’s a dead-end street. And probably no one expects it to stay that way.
Secondly, I assumed that access would be via the other two adjacent streets. I can just imagine your neighbors’ reactions, all of whom stick to the pedestrian zone, while you are the only one widening it and driving in and out. They won’t be happy that the safe path for the children will now also be used by cars.
True shade is only on the north side. The sun moves throughout the day. A south-facing terrace naturally gets the most sun—though not always ideal—but if the street is that quiet, I would probably arrange it that way as well. Still, I wouldn’t expand the footpath. That would be really uncomfortable for me.
Secondly, I assumed that access would be via the other two adjacent streets. I can just imagine your neighbors’ reactions, all of whom stick to the pedestrian zone, while you are the only one widening it and driving in and out. They won’t be happy that the safe path for the children will now also be used by cars.
True shade is only on the north side. The sun moves throughout the day. A south-facing terrace naturally gets the most sun—though not always ideal—but if the street is that quiet, I would probably arrange it that way as well. Still, I wouldn’t expand the footpath. That would be really uncomfortable for me.
Right, I should have explained that better. I hadn’t thought that far ahead on this point.
However, the dead-end will remain in place in the future as well. When the city created the development plan, the residents living at the end of the street called Eichenforst raised objections to extending the street further. They had no issues with a residential area being built there, but opposed the road itself. If the street were open, many people would use it as a shortcut instead of driving around. As a result, the residents managed to have the dead-end established as a condition with the city for allowing the construction in Eichenforst.
Therefore, Eichenforst remains a public street ending in a dead-end, while the side streets are private roads belonging to the houses. These private roads only extend to the end of the properties and are also dead-ends. The private roads serve solely as access routes to individual homes. Overall, this means there will be very little traffic in the area. The Emsring is also not a main road. The main road is one street further away... and from there you hardly notice the new development at all.
However, the dead-end will remain in place in the future as well. When the city created the development plan, the residents living at the end of the street called Eichenforst raised objections to extending the street further. They had no issues with a residential area being built there, but opposed the road itself. If the street were open, many people would use it as a shortcut instead of driving around. As a result, the residents managed to have the dead-end established as a condition with the city for allowing the construction in Eichenforst.
Therefore, Eichenforst remains a public street ending in a dead-end, while the side streets are private roads belonging to the houses. These private roads only extend to the end of the properties and are also dead-ends. The private roads serve solely as access routes to individual homes. Overall, this means there will be very little traffic in the area. The Emsring is also not a main road. The main road is one street further away... and from there you hardly notice the new development at all.
I’m afraid I have to disappoint you: the way you have it drawn won’t work.
Here you have a tiny house on a 19-meter (62 feet) wide lot.
You have a 5-meter (16 feet) setback on the south side and 1.5 to 2 meters (5 to 6.5 feet) on the north side (who comes up with this „up to“?).
With that layout, a terrace as you’ve drawn it won’t be possible.
First, think about the driveway and grab a pencil and graph paper if you’re struggling with the proportions. [emoji2]
Here you have a tiny house on a 19-meter (62 feet) wide lot.
You have a 5-meter (16 feet) setback on the south side and 1.5 to 2 meters (5 to 6.5 feet) on the north side (who comes up with this „up to“?).
With that layout, a terrace as you’ve drawn it won’t be possible.
First, think about the driveway and grab a pencil and graph paper if you’re struggling with the proportions. [emoji2]
Similar topics