Hello everyone,
finally, we can share our initial planning stages for discussion. We are still in the conceptual phase because, for us, it was first about determining whether the plot is suitable for our ideas. Therefore, no contract has been signed yet. However, we definitely want to continue working with the architect.
The reason for the "preliminary investigation" with the architect was that the plot has a few restrictions that need to be considered in the design and might have been dealbreakers for some buyers. These are:
- The large row housing development to the west with fixed building heights of 10.5 m (35 ft) for the full floors and 13.5 m (44 ft) for the final attic floor. These heights must be strictly observed. The distance between our house edge and the row housing edge is 16 m (52 ft).
- The fact that it is a sloping plot with a 3 m (10 ft) gradient from southwest to north.
The discussion about the plot itself already took place here: https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/Grundstück-die-zweite-Hilfe-bei-der-Beurteilung.30148/
We concluded that we are comfortable with the purchase and the possibilities the plot offers. Compared to other plots, it has its own unique charms.
Further general remarks on the design:
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 502 sqm (5400 sqft)
Slope: Yes, sloped. Approx. 3 m (10 ft) height difference from southwest to north
Floor area ratio (FAR): 0.4
Plot ratio: 0.8
Building window, building line, and boundary: See excerpt from development plan (map oriented north)
Number of parking spaces: 1.5 per residential unit
Maximum possible residential units: 2
Number of floors: 2 full floors allowed, attic floor not allowed
Roof style: pitched roof and flat roof allowed
Orientation: no specifications
Maximum heights/limits: Residential building height max. 6.5 m (21 ft) and max. 10.5 m (35 ft) total building height measured from top of access road in the northeast
Further requirements: Garages/carports only allowed within the building window or the designated yellow-marked areas
Client Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: Bauhaus, flat roof -> Ideally, we want to incorporate the Bauhaus style with some authentic elements and base the concept accordingly. We can also imagine a minimalist pitched roof.
Basement, floors: Basement (KG), ground floor (EG), and upper floor (OG)
Number and age of occupants: 29 + 28 + 1 year old. It would be nice if we could be four in the future.
Room requirements, ground floor and upper floor: Together approximately +/- 170 sqm (1830 sqft) of living space
Office: We definitely need an office.
Guest sleepers per year: 3-4
Open or closed architecture: We are generally fans of open architecture.
Conservative or modern construction: modern construction
Open kitchen, kitchen island: Yes, an open kitchen with a kitchen island would be our ideal choice.
Number of dining seats: 6-12
Fireplace: No
Music/stereo wall: There should definitely be space for a 5.1 sound system.
Balcony, roof terrace: Not strictly necessary. However, we had the idea of adding a small roof terrace with filtered facade elements as privacy screens (this is reflected in our version of the room program). Inspired by the idea of a windowless house with interior courtyards in parts.
Garage, carport: Carport
Utility garden, greenhouse: No
Additional wishes:
House Design
Who designed it: Concept from the architect and alternative versions of the room program from us.
What do you like most? Why? Split-level and open void space that reflect the idea of building with the terrain and having two terraces protected by pergolas with access to upper and lower levels. We also like that it is possible to walk all around the house. The open void keeps it airy and creates a continuous sightline upwards that could be closed with a skylight, for example. The volume was deliberately placed on the western edge of the building window, even though this brings it closer to the row housing, to enable a more sheltered terrace to the east. Because to the east, there are only garden plots and a narrow access road that is not intended as a main access.
What do you dislike? Why? Room layout: basically too small and difficult-to-use room arrangement. We are reluctant to give up the split-level because it carries the idea of working with the terrain and provides access to the lower and upper areas. On the other hand, it consumes space and functionality. The same applies to a potential open void above. Also, overall, the rooms are too small, especially given that there should be quite a bit of space available with 170 sqm (1830 sqft) of living area.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: No detailed cost breakdown by work stages yet. However, we provided our budget and the concept was developed based on the assessment that it was feasible.
Personal price limit for the house, including equipment: maximum $625,000
Preferred heating technology: Geothermal
If You Have to Give Up Something, on which details/extensions
-can you give up: Although reluctantly, if necessary, on controlled ventilation, home automation, and geothermal heating.
-can you not give up: External blinds, a garden on the east side as a protected area for dining and relaxing since the front street is not the main access road and should be screened accordingly with planting.
What is the Most Important/Basic Question About the Floor Plan in 130 Characters?
We obviously want honest opinions on our project to get ideas on what to consider and especially how to improve things. We currently find it difficult to judge the room sizes and layout. We are looking for ideas on how to improve without straying from the core concept.
[IMG alt="OG.jpg"]https://www.hausbau-forum.de/data/attachments/34/34245-1dba1bcffe9276a24d7771734e7f8356.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG alt="EG_KG.jpg"]https://www.hausbau-forum.de/data/attachments/34/34246-c4723bc5436c3067eb0d370cb371b16a.jpg[/IMG]
finally, we can share our initial planning stages for discussion. We are still in the conceptual phase because, for us, it was first about determining whether the plot is suitable for our ideas. Therefore, no contract has been signed yet. However, we definitely want to continue working with the architect.
The reason for the "preliminary investigation" with the architect was that the plot has a few restrictions that need to be considered in the design and might have been dealbreakers for some buyers. These are:
- The large row housing development to the west with fixed building heights of 10.5 m (35 ft) for the full floors and 13.5 m (44 ft) for the final attic floor. These heights must be strictly observed. The distance between our house edge and the row housing edge is 16 m (52 ft).
- The fact that it is a sloping plot with a 3 m (10 ft) gradient from southwest to north.
The discussion about the plot itself already took place here: https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/Grundstück-die-zweite-Hilfe-bei-der-Beurteilung.30148/
We concluded that we are comfortable with the purchase and the possibilities the plot offers. Compared to other plots, it has its own unique charms.
Further general remarks on the design:
- Before discussing the design from the architect’s concept, it is important to know that the main focus was, as mentioned, to present the fundamental idea, positioning, and exterior shell. Accordingly, the room layout was secondary. So far, windows and similar details are completely missing.
- Access to the basement is provided via the split-level in the design. However, this will definitely be solved by the main staircase. This was proposed as well.
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 502 sqm (5400 sqft)
Slope: Yes, sloped. Approx. 3 m (10 ft) height difference from southwest to north
Floor area ratio (FAR): 0.4
Plot ratio: 0.8
Building window, building line, and boundary: See excerpt from development plan (map oriented north)
Number of parking spaces: 1.5 per residential unit
Maximum possible residential units: 2
Number of floors: 2 full floors allowed, attic floor not allowed
Roof style: pitched roof and flat roof allowed
Orientation: no specifications
Maximum heights/limits: Residential building height max. 6.5 m (21 ft) and max. 10.5 m (35 ft) total building height measured from top of access road in the northeast
Further requirements: Garages/carports only allowed within the building window or the designated yellow-marked areas
Client Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: Bauhaus, flat roof -> Ideally, we want to incorporate the Bauhaus style with some authentic elements and base the concept accordingly. We can also imagine a minimalist pitched roof.
Basement, floors: Basement (KG), ground floor (EG), and upper floor (OG)
Number and age of occupants: 29 + 28 + 1 year old. It would be nice if we could be four in the future.
Room requirements, ground floor and upper floor: Together approximately +/- 170 sqm (1830 sqft) of living space
Office: We definitely need an office.
Guest sleepers per year: 3-4
Open or closed architecture: We are generally fans of open architecture.
Conservative or modern construction: modern construction
Open kitchen, kitchen island: Yes, an open kitchen with a kitchen island would be our ideal choice.
Number of dining seats: 6-12
Fireplace: No
Music/stereo wall: There should definitely be space for a 5.1 sound system.
Balcony, roof terrace: Not strictly necessary. However, we had the idea of adding a small roof terrace with filtered facade elements as privacy screens (this is reflected in our version of the room program). Inspired by the idea of a windowless house with interior courtyards in parts.
Garage, carport: Carport
Utility garden, greenhouse: No
Additional wishes:
- Use of controlled residential ventilation
- External blinds / shutters
- Use of home automation system (e.g. KNX or Free@Home)
House Design
Who designed it: Concept from the architect and alternative versions of the room program from us.
What do you like most? Why? Split-level and open void space that reflect the idea of building with the terrain and having two terraces protected by pergolas with access to upper and lower levels. We also like that it is possible to walk all around the house. The open void keeps it airy and creates a continuous sightline upwards that could be closed with a skylight, for example. The volume was deliberately placed on the western edge of the building window, even though this brings it closer to the row housing, to enable a more sheltered terrace to the east. Because to the east, there are only garden plots and a narrow access road that is not intended as a main access.
What do you dislike? Why? Room layout: basically too small and difficult-to-use room arrangement. We are reluctant to give up the split-level because it carries the idea of working with the terrain and provides access to the lower and upper areas. On the other hand, it consumes space and functionality. The same applies to a potential open void above. Also, overall, the rooms are too small, especially given that there should be quite a bit of space available with 170 sqm (1830 sqft) of living area.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: No detailed cost breakdown by work stages yet. However, we provided our budget and the concept was developed based on the assessment that it was feasible.
Personal price limit for the house, including equipment: maximum $625,000
Preferred heating technology: Geothermal
If You Have to Give Up Something, on which details/extensions
-can you give up: Although reluctantly, if necessary, on controlled ventilation, home automation, and geothermal heating.
-can you not give up: External blinds, a garden on the east side as a protected area for dining and relaxing since the front street is not the main access road and should be screened accordingly with planting.
What is the Most Important/Basic Question About the Floor Plan in 130 Characters?
We obviously want honest opinions on our project to get ideas on what to consider and especially how to improve things. We currently find it difficult to judge the room sizes and layout. We are looking for ideas on how to improve without straying from the core concept.
[IMG alt="OG.jpg"]https://www.hausbau-forum.de/data/attachments/34/34245-1dba1bcffe9276a24d7771734e7f8356.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG alt="EG_KG.jpg"]https://www.hausbau-forum.de/data/attachments/34/34246-c4723bc5436c3067eb0d370cb371b16a.jpg[/IMG]
M
Mottenhausen29 May 2019 11:50I find the floor plan very appealing, especially the atriums, the open playroom gallery, and the living area spread across multiple levels—these are great ideas. The only drawback is that they have been squeezed into a house that’s too small for them!
PS. We are also building with atriums and have completely eliminated interior walls on the upper floor (except in the children's rooms), meaning the bathroom and sleeping areas open entirely to the atrium above the living/dining/kitchen area. So it can get even more unconventional—don’t worry if people here are already concerned about hearing the TV sound around corners and through walls.
But to get back to your layout on a conceptual level: The Bauhaus villa style also relies on interlocking cuboid elements. A simple cube can sometimes look like a hospital, so the basement/ground/upper floors should be set back or pushed forward in parts to create overlapping areas, as well as terraces and green spaces. I’m attaching two random Google images to show you what you currently have planned (bottom) and what you were probably aiming for (top). Your parking area doesn’t change much here either—it’s just next to the house with a walkable roof, but it doesn’t integrate with the building. Considering this perspective and the 7.40m (24 ft 3 in) height limitation mentioned above, which doesn’t suit the interior, I would recommend starting from scratch. A bit of cosmetic adjustment won’t get you far with the current floor plan.
PS. We are also building with atriums and have completely eliminated interior walls on the upper floor (except in the children's rooms), meaning the bathroom and sleeping areas open entirely to the atrium above the living/dining/kitchen area. So it can get even more unconventional—don’t worry if people here are already concerned about hearing the TV sound around corners and through walls.
But to get back to your layout on a conceptual level: The Bauhaus villa style also relies on interlocking cuboid elements. A simple cube can sometimes look like a hospital, so the basement/ground/upper floors should be set back or pushed forward in parts to create overlapping areas, as well as terraces and green spaces. I’m attaching two random Google images to show you what you currently have planned (bottom) and what you were probably aiming for (top). Your parking area doesn’t change much here either—it’s just next to the house with a walkable roof, but it doesn’t integrate with the building. Considering this perspective and the 7.40m (24 ft 3 in) height limitation mentioned above, which doesn’t suit the interior, I would recommend starting from scratch. A bit of cosmetic adjustment won’t get you far with the current floor plan.
H
hampshire29 May 2019 12:46@Mottenhausen I would like to see your house design sometime. Not to give unsolicited feedback, but your comments above piqued my curiosity.
haydee schrieb:
Garden level
Kitchen and dining area
Loss of at least one basement room
Ground floor
Living area
Leave open space (void)
Guest/office room larger
Wardrobe larger
Possibly a small storage room (to compensate for the loss of basement space)
Upper floor
Remove the open space (void)
Bathroom reasonably sized – it’s your family bathroom, and two people should fit comfortably, with space for towels and toiletries
Possibly a gallery with a play area, later a reading corner
or a small utility room since laundry will be handled there So, I’ll gradually start commenting on your suggestions and tips.
Thanks to everyone so far. Your opinions and comments have become quite diverse and sometimes contradictory, but they all read as helpful.
@haydee: I really like your proposal and already have a clear idea in mind. In my opinion, the basement area was already quite generous, so accepting some “floor space loss” here is feasible. Moving the kitchen and dining areas would significantly improve the space situation on the ground floor. You might also want to consider @11ant’s critique and shape the building in an L layout. That means shortening the longer side a bit and increasing the width slightly. For the overhang on the L shape, which would likely be built toward the carport, you could try integrating a half-landing staircase connecting the basement, ground floor, and upper floor instead of a straight staircase. The advantage of compressing the plan this way would also be a larger south-facing garden section. Regarding the exterior shell, I have to agree with [USER=46458]@Mottenhausen that some clever design elements are needed to avoid an awkward, blocky shape. We’ve actually already been thinking about that.
I will try to put these ideas on paper in the next few days.
Mottenhausen schrieb:
I’m attaching two random Google images to show you your current plan (bottom) and what you probably aimed for (top).At the same time, these are textbook examples of Neo Bauhaus (top) and Bauhaus (bottom).I briefly mentioned SupaCriz’s house earlier; here I am now providing links to this and other hillside house threads:
https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/erster-Entwurf-Grundriss-efh-ca-200qm-bitte-um-Feedback.18830/page-3
https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/erstentwurf-vom-bauzeichner-für-unser-Einfamilienhaus.26764/page-4
https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/grundrissplanung-für-efh-mit-Keller-auf-Hanggrundstück.25524/
https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/Grundrisse-183m-efh-an-Hanglage.25578/
https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/Terrassentür-maximal-funktionierende-breite.25889/page-3
There is also a well-functioning house layout on a clearly very different site by @matte1987 https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/Haus-mit-Dachterrasse-in-passau.13943/page-10, which can now be admired in the house photos thread.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Hello everyone,
There are no updates on the design yet, but we have now obtained the contact details of the immediate neighbor. It turned out that they are one of the original landowners and therefore have no obligation to build.
After a phone call with the owner, it is also clear that there are currently no plans to build, maybe the sons in the future. The timeline is very unclear. In my opinion, the site conditions already make coordination necessary. We plan to add fill to the front part of the plot along the eastern street edge to create a terrace area in front of the house (see design).
As I understand it, our ideas about the basic shaping are quite similar. However, if nothing happens on the neighboring building plot and no fill is added, we would first have to take care of slope stabilization or, if necessary, support it.
Can someone advise on the building regulation situation at the boundary, or what basis we should use going into a second discussion with the owner? Would it be appropriate to suggest—assuming our basic views on shaping align—that the other owner also starts adding fill, even though they cannot yet predict when they will build?
Attached is a picture showing the property boundary and the elevation conditions at the front edge I am referring to.
There are no updates on the design yet, but we have now obtained the contact details of the immediate neighbor. It turned out that they are one of the original landowners and therefore have no obligation to build.
After a phone call with the owner, it is also clear that there are currently no plans to build, maybe the sons in the future. The timeline is very unclear. In my opinion, the site conditions already make coordination necessary. We plan to add fill to the front part of the plot along the eastern street edge to create a terrace area in front of the house (see design).
As I understand it, our ideas about the basic shaping are quite similar. However, if nothing happens on the neighboring building plot and no fill is added, we would first have to take care of slope stabilization or, if necessary, support it.
Can someone advise on the building regulation situation at the boundary, or what basis we should use going into a second discussion with the owner? Would it be appropriate to suggest—assuming our basic views on shaping align—that the other owner also starts adding fill, even though they cannot yet predict when they will build?
Attached is a picture showing the property boundary and the elevation conditions at the front edge I am referring to.
Similar topics