ᐅ Opinions on Single-Family Homes with a Secondary Suite Floor Plans
Created on: 8 Dec 2018 23:18
F
fullkehr
Hello everyone,
we are currently planning our single-family home with a separate apartment. I would like to hear your opinions on the floor plans and so on.
The separate apartment is intended for our parents.
I feel like the house takes up quite a lot of space on the lot. The lot is 1050 m² (11,302 sq ft). We have two small children, and having a garden is important for them. On the other hand, it is a quiet residential area in a new development where children often play in the streets anyway.
Good luck
Volker
we are currently planning our single-family home with a separate apartment. I would like to hear your opinions on the floor plans and so on.
The separate apartment is intended for our parents.
I feel like the house takes up quite a lot of space on the lot. The lot is 1050 m² (11,302 sq ft). We have two small children, and having a garden is important for them. On the other hand, it is a quiet residential area in a new development where children often play in the streets anyway.
Good luck
Volker
kaho674 schrieb:
My main concern is the waste of roof space above the granny flat. The building is a huge block and consumes garden area, even though that’s not necessary. The study and utility room could easily be moved upstairs. The whole design could be more compact without losing any floor space if the upper floor is used consistently. fullkehr schrieb:
Site coverage ratio 0.6
Floor area ratio 40% I’m not sure if there’s a transfer error here, or if it’s related to the building shape/roof design.
ypg schrieb:
I’m not sure if there’s a transmission error here or if it’s due to the house shape/roof design Floor area ratio = 0.4 – meaning 420m² (4,520 ft²) can be built, but not necessarily all on the ground floor, even though the plot ratio = 0.6, correct? Or do you mean the regulation requires a single-story building?
Even if that’s the case, I think it’s a waste not to use the parents’ roof space at all. But even worse is building over the garden without cause, leaving no room for the children to play.
Is there any indication of what the treatment room is for?
I find the entire floor plan confusing.
A storage room that is not usable.
The gallery has a better location than the kid’s room, which is oriented to the northeast.
Why have a dining table if the counter is supposed to serve as a makeshift family area? A nice large kitchen-living area means a makeshift solution is unnecessary.
No direct connection between the living units.
Also, in the grandparents’ area, there is a long narrow corridor and a utility room.
I find the entire floor plan confusing.
A storage room that is not usable.
The gallery has a better location than the kid’s room, which is oriented to the northeast.
Why have a dining table if the counter is supposed to serve as a makeshift family area? A nice large kitchen-living area means a makeshift solution is unnecessary.
No direct connection between the living units.
Also, in the grandparents’ area, there is a long narrow corridor and a utility room.
kaho674 schrieb:
Floor area ratio = 0.4 – meaning 420m² (4,521 sq ft) can be built, but not necessarily on the ground floor, even if the site coverage ratio = 0.6, right? Or do you mean it is a one-story building requirement? I don’t know.
kaho674 schrieb:
Even so. Not using the parents’ roof at all seems like a waste to me. But what’s even worse is unnecessarily building over the garden so that there’s no room left for the children to play.If you want to build a house with Canadian roots and a seaside vibe, then the house makes sense.
But I see it more realistically and relaxed: if you have the space, you can build outwards. Townhouses are only built because the plots are getting so small.
With 1000m² (10,764 sq ft) and the ideal floor area ratio/site coverage ratio, you can really focus on the house.
Children don’t need a private playground in the neighborhood on their own land; the garden is more than enough.
11ant schrieb:
Wow. I’d say: interesting. Kind of ’80s architectural style. And in my opinion, quite massive fortress-like walls.
Honestly, I only liked the bird’s-eye view until I looked at
https://www.hausbau-forum.de/attachments/elw-treppe-Hauswirtschaftsraum-269599-1-png.22459/
Now I’m wondering whether this driveway layout is more about exceptional maneuvering enthusiasm or if it’s bordering on masochism. I’d probably try to create my own small turning area.We have 5 meters (16 feet) width and depth and no problem making the car turn.
In my opinion, your concerns can be ignored here.
Well, it probably comes down to personal perception of what everyone considers "space." 1000 is a great size – for a single-family house. For two houses (which it is), I find it a bit tight.
If necessary, then it is what it is. I just always find it a shame when too much area is concreted over without reason, leaving no chance for birds, worms, and insects.
If necessary, then it is what it is. I just always find it a shame when too much area is concreted over without reason, leaving no chance for birds, worms, and insects.
Similar topics