Hello everyone!
Although we are from Austria and building here, we have been following various posts in this forum for some time. There are many creative minds here, and I really appreciate your advice in the other discussions.
We ourselves have been in the house planning phase for quite a while. We recently purchased a plot of land south of Vienna and plan to start construction in 2020. We want to build with solid construction methods, but we are still deciding between brick (which is very common here) and aerated concrete blocks (we really like the kit house concept from Ytong based on what we’ve heard so far, although it is quite rare in our area).
Efficiency in the use of living space is very important to us (no unnecessary features, no long hallways, no balconies or bay windows), as well as in the building services (heat pump, controlled mechanical ventilation system, etc.).
I assume there isn’t much experience here with Austrian building regulations, so I will try to answer any questions that come up as quickly and competently as possible.
Here is the completed questionnaire:
Zoning Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 604 m² (6500 ft² approx.)
Slope: No, completely flat
Site coverage ratio: (not applicable here) - 32% buildable area
Floor area ratio: (not applicable here)
Building setback lines and boundaries: front setback 3 m (10 ft), side setback 3 m (10 ft) or half the eave height of the adjoining façade – whichever is greater, rear setback 3 m (10 ft)
Edge building restrictions: within the setback zone up to a maximum height of 3 m (10 ft)
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of floors: not specified in the zoning plan
Roof shape: no restriction according to zoning plan
Architectural style: no restriction
Orientation: no restriction
Maximum height/limits: max. building height 6.8 m (22 ft) (eave height)
Other requirements: none
Client Requirements
Style, roof shape, building type: classic rectangular shape, gable roof or staggered shed roof, simple building form without bay windows or dormers, no balconies!
Basement, floors: basement (gym, workshop, laundry, mainly storage), ground floor (living areas + guest room), upper floor (bedrooms)
Number of occupants, ages: male 28, female 34, child 0.5 years, child 11 years (every second weekend + school holidays)
Space requirements ground floor, upper floor: ground floor (shower bathroom, guest room/home office/play/multi-purpose room, living room, kitchen, pantry), upper floor (bedroom including walk-in closet, 2 children’s rooms, bathroom), basement (gym, laundry, storage, workshop)
Office: family use or home office?: 80% family use as playroom, 10% home office, 10% guest room
Overnight guests per year: approximately 5, mainly relatives visiting for various celebrations from afar
Open or closed layout: open plan
Conservative or modern construction: rather conservative but open to “unconventional ideas”
Open kitchen, kitchen island: open kitchen with breakfast bar
Number of dining seats: permanently 6, at family celebrations minimum 12 temporarily, >16 long term
Fireplace: no
Music/speaker wall: no – but large TV frequently used
Balcony, roof terrace: definitely no!
Garage, carport: carport within the setback zone (on the north side?)
Vegetable garden, greenhouse: definitely yes! Gardening is a big wish and the main reason for the whole project
Other wishes/special features/daily routines, explanations if desired: The house should be as efficient as possible (during construction and especially in operation), therefore no awkward bay windows etc. (ratio of surface to volume)
Additional requests: controlled mechanical ventilation system, laundry chute, non-load-bearing partition wall between the children’s rooms so it can be removed in a few years if the older child no longer lives at home. The most important thing is a large garden, so that’s why the basement is desired to minimize the building footprint. The kitchen must be large enough for at least two people to cook at the same time – this is currently a problem in our apartment.
House Design
Designed by: DIY with a lot of input from planners
What do you like? Why?: almost all wishes implemented
What do you dislike? Why?: pantry is quite small, upper floor still not quite perfect, niche in the corridor as storage replacement for vacuum cleaner etc.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: €430,000 turnkey, €350,000 “turnkey with owner involvement”
Personal price limit for house, including fixtures and fittings: €350,000 in shell and core condition is the goal, with a comfortable buffer, but that would be our ideal
Preferred heating technology: heat pump with ground source collector (trench collector)
Note: We are not under time pressure for planning or construction. We are very willing and able to do much of the work on the house ourselves. Providing appropriate “self-performance proof” for the bank is not a problem either. This helps keep construction costs low.
If you have to give up something, which details/finishes
- could you give up: almost everything except the pantry and open kitchen
- could you not give up: pantry, open kitchen, and preferably not the controlled ventilation
Why is the design the way it is now?
A mix of many examples from model home parks, magazines, and many discussions with planners/architects etc.
What do you think makes it particularly good or bad?
All the rooms we imagined are present, relatively short circulation routes, hardly any wasted space
What is the most important/basic question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
What do you think of the design? Where do you see potential for improvement? Placement of laundry chute?
I look forward to your opinions and comments!
Best regards,
your Gugelhupf
Although we are from Austria and building here, we have been following various posts in this forum for some time. There are many creative minds here, and I really appreciate your advice in the other discussions.
We ourselves have been in the house planning phase for quite a while. We recently purchased a plot of land south of Vienna and plan to start construction in 2020. We want to build with solid construction methods, but we are still deciding between brick (which is very common here) and aerated concrete blocks (we really like the kit house concept from Ytong based on what we’ve heard so far, although it is quite rare in our area).
Efficiency in the use of living space is very important to us (no unnecessary features, no long hallways, no balconies or bay windows), as well as in the building services (heat pump, controlled mechanical ventilation system, etc.).
I assume there isn’t much experience here with Austrian building regulations, so I will try to answer any questions that come up as quickly and competently as possible.
Here is the completed questionnaire:
Zoning Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 604 m² (6500 ft² approx.)
Slope: No, completely flat
Site coverage ratio: (not applicable here) - 32% buildable area
Floor area ratio: (not applicable here)
Building setback lines and boundaries: front setback 3 m (10 ft), side setback 3 m (10 ft) or half the eave height of the adjoining façade – whichever is greater, rear setback 3 m (10 ft)
Edge building restrictions: within the setback zone up to a maximum height of 3 m (10 ft)
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of floors: not specified in the zoning plan
Roof shape: no restriction according to zoning plan
Architectural style: no restriction
Orientation: no restriction
Maximum height/limits: max. building height 6.8 m (22 ft) (eave height)
Other requirements: none
Client Requirements
Style, roof shape, building type: classic rectangular shape, gable roof or staggered shed roof, simple building form without bay windows or dormers, no balconies!
Basement, floors: basement (gym, workshop, laundry, mainly storage), ground floor (living areas + guest room), upper floor (bedrooms)
Number of occupants, ages: male 28, female 34, child 0.5 years, child 11 years (every second weekend + school holidays)
Space requirements ground floor, upper floor: ground floor (shower bathroom, guest room/home office/play/multi-purpose room, living room, kitchen, pantry), upper floor (bedroom including walk-in closet, 2 children’s rooms, bathroom), basement (gym, laundry, storage, workshop)
Office: family use or home office?: 80% family use as playroom, 10% home office, 10% guest room
Overnight guests per year: approximately 5, mainly relatives visiting for various celebrations from afar
Open or closed layout: open plan
Conservative or modern construction: rather conservative but open to “unconventional ideas”
Open kitchen, kitchen island: open kitchen with breakfast bar
Number of dining seats: permanently 6, at family celebrations minimum 12 temporarily, >16 long term
Fireplace: no
Music/speaker wall: no – but large TV frequently used
Balcony, roof terrace: definitely no!
Garage, carport: carport within the setback zone (on the north side?)
Vegetable garden, greenhouse: definitely yes! Gardening is a big wish and the main reason for the whole project
Other wishes/special features/daily routines, explanations if desired: The house should be as efficient as possible (during construction and especially in operation), therefore no awkward bay windows etc. (ratio of surface to volume)
Additional requests: controlled mechanical ventilation system, laundry chute, non-load-bearing partition wall between the children’s rooms so it can be removed in a few years if the older child no longer lives at home. The most important thing is a large garden, so that’s why the basement is desired to minimize the building footprint. The kitchen must be large enough for at least two people to cook at the same time – this is currently a problem in our apartment.
House Design
Designed by: DIY with a lot of input from planners
What do you like? Why?: almost all wishes implemented
What do you dislike? Why?: pantry is quite small, upper floor still not quite perfect, niche in the corridor as storage replacement for vacuum cleaner etc.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: €430,000 turnkey, €350,000 “turnkey with owner involvement”
Personal price limit for house, including fixtures and fittings: €350,000 in shell and core condition is the goal, with a comfortable buffer, but that would be our ideal
Preferred heating technology: heat pump with ground source collector (trench collector)
Note: We are not under time pressure for planning or construction. We are very willing and able to do much of the work on the house ourselves. Providing appropriate “self-performance proof” for the bank is not a problem either. This helps keep construction costs low.
If you have to give up something, which details/finishes
- could you give up: almost everything except the pantry and open kitchen
- could you not give up: pantry, open kitchen, and preferably not the controlled ventilation
Why is the design the way it is now?
A mix of many examples from model home parks, magazines, and many discussions with planners/architects etc.
What do you think makes it particularly good or bad?
All the rooms we imagined are present, relatively short circulation routes, hardly any wasted space
What is the most important/basic question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
What do you think of the design? Where do you see potential for improvement? Placement of laundry chute?
I look forward to your opinions and comments!
Best regards,
your Gugelhupf
Gugelhupf schrieb:
He provided valuable input that we will definitely take into account. And? Should we just be quiet, or share something first?
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
G
Gugelhupf7 Apr 2019 21:35So, we’re back from the weekend and have accomplished quite a bit. We cut down trees and shrubs, cleared the area, filled the compost, etc.
In brief:
So, we are continuing to focus on the outdoor areas, driveway, carport, terrace, etc. Sketches of the currently discussed ideas will be shared soon.
Wishing you a great start to the new week!
Best regards,
Gugelhupf
11ant schrieb:
und ? - soll´n mer bleed sterm, oder erzöistas ?
In brief:
- Especially with such narrow plots, we should first focus on the driveway and the exterior design of the house. This sets the framework for the house size and orientation, and “the rooms can then be arranged sensibly somehow.” This is similar to what has already been recommended here in the forum.
- Since we are in a very windy area, we should carefully consider window shading. Venetian blinds (external blinds) are often not suitable due to the wind, as they can be easily damaged. He even recommended classic shutters.
- If the groundwater is really as deep as suspected (more than 20 meters (65 feet)), he recommends a masonry basement (using Ytong blocks, of course) to save costs. However, we will definitely have soil tests done before committing to any experiments…
- We like the idea of a detached shed roof. He mentioned that, as far as he knows (although he admitted to having only supervised one project with such a roof), this is only possible with a timber frame construction and is therefore very expensive. He would recommend a traditional shed roof or flat roof instead, as these are—according to him—the most cost-effective options when considering everything holistically, including construction costs, maintenance, and build time.
So, we are continuing to focus on the outdoor areas, driveway, carport, terrace, etc. Sketches of the currently discussed ideas will be shared soon.
Wishing you a great start to the new week!
Best regards,
Gugelhupf
Gugelhupf schrieb:
We would like a split shed roof. He said, as far as he knows (although he admitted to having only worked on one project with this kind of roof), this is only possible with a timber frame structure and therefore very expensive. I can only guess what he means: that it has to be built with rafters instead of trusses. In the spirit of Robert Lembke’s “let’s just say yes,” I agree with him there.
Gugelhupf schrieb:
He would advise us to choose a traditional shed roof or a flat roof because, according to him, those are the most cost-effective options when considering everything as a whole. I would rather say no to that.
A single-pitch shed roof with a relatively low slope, yes. But a flat roof being cheap? No, if it’s supposed to be watertight, rather not.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
G
Gugelhupf9 Apr 2019 08:4811ant schrieb:
I can only guess what he meant: namely, that it should be constructed with rafters instead of trusses. In the spirit of Robert Lembke’s "let’s just agree," I agree with him here. Specifically, he meant the "vertical section" between the two roof slopes, which cannot be built using bricks or Ytong blocks but must be constructed as a timber structure integrated with the roof. He pointed out that otherwise, the rafters would extend into the masonry, which would not work due to the different thermal expansion properties. Therefore, the wall above must also be made of wood.
Gugelhupf schrieb:
Specifically, in this case he meant the "vertical section" between the two roof slopes, which cannot be constructed from brick or Ytong solid blocks, but must be built as a timber structure integrated with the roof. I have also not yet found a "proper technical term" for the "ridge gable."
And yes, if its base is not a purlin on a wall, it will probably have to be designed as part of the roof frame – but it might also be possible as a truss construction. In my opinion, the "offset monopitch roof" is a design from the 1980s, like aerobics with leg warmers.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
G
Gugelhupf9 Apr 2019 21:45We visited the local building authority today to gather some information that I’d like to share with you.
Here are the three versions of parking spaces we are currently discussing:
1.) Parking spaces on the north side:
Advantage: Very space-saving; instead of a carport, a garage could also be built.
Disadvantage: Very tight – especially considering that cars might become wider in the future (SUVs) or that more space might be needed for getting in and out as we get older.
2.) Parking spaces at the front and side:
Advantage: Still relatively space-saving, but plenty of room for getting in and out; parking space 2 on the south side does not block sunlight to the house since it is not covered.
Disadvantage: Parking space 1 may not be enclosed as a garage, parking space 2 may be, but this could block some sunlight; it might be tricky to maneuver when driving in and out towards the carport (however, some friends of ours have solved it this way without any problems).
3.) Parking spaces at the front:
Advantage: Convenient for getting in and out, and basically no driveway gate needed.
Disadvantage: None of the parking spaces may be enclosed as garages; takes up the most garden space.
We are therefore leaning more towards version 2 or 3...
- The groundwater on our property is at about 20-30m (65-100 ft) depth with very gravelly soil – no standing water – so we are considering a masonry basement instead of a waterproof concrete one.
- The sewer line is located in the street at about 2.3m (7.5 ft) depth, so a pumping station would be necessary in the basement for any potential laundry rooms (which we don’t plan to have anyway).
- A carport up to a maximum height of 3m (10 ft) is permitted in the front setback area.
- In the side setback area, a carport, garage, or a “lesser” outbuilding (i.e., without a function for the dwelling, no boiler room, etc.) up to a maximum height of 3m (10 ft) is allowed.
Here are the three versions of parking spaces we are currently discussing:
1.) Parking spaces on the north side:
Advantage: Very space-saving; instead of a carport, a garage could also be built.
Disadvantage: Very tight – especially considering that cars might become wider in the future (SUVs) or that more space might be needed for getting in and out as we get older.
2.) Parking spaces at the front and side:
Advantage: Still relatively space-saving, but plenty of room for getting in and out; parking space 2 on the south side does not block sunlight to the house since it is not covered.
Disadvantage: Parking space 1 may not be enclosed as a garage, parking space 2 may be, but this could block some sunlight; it might be tricky to maneuver when driving in and out towards the carport (however, some friends of ours have solved it this way without any problems).
3.) Parking spaces at the front:
Advantage: Convenient for getting in and out, and basically no driveway gate needed.
Disadvantage: None of the parking spaces may be enclosed as garages; takes up the most garden space.
We are therefore leaning more towards version 2 or 3...
Similar topics