ᐅ Single-family house with a pitched roof – any suggestions for improvements?
Created on: 23 Dec 2019 14:46
A
Aldo889
Hello everyone,
I have been following this forum for a while and would like to introduce our project. We are still relatively at the beginning and plan to start at the end of next year. We have now received the first draft from a general contractor, with whom we will probably build.
1. Fundamentals:
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size – approx. 1200 m² (14,580 sq ft)
Slope – slight, see preliminary site plan
Site coverage ratio – no specification
Floor area ratio – no specification
Building envelope, building line and boundary – no specification
Edge development – no specification, 5 m (16 ft) wide strip on the east side
Number of parking spaces – no specification, 2 desired
Number of floors – 1 full story (Hesse)
Roof style – no specification
Architectural style – no specification
Orientation – main orientation north-south specified, approval for east-west orientation is available
Maximum height / limits – none
Other specifications – none
Requirements from the builders
Architectural style, roof type, building type – classic gable roof, 1.5 stories
Basement, number of stories – not planned, not necessary
Number of occupants, ages – currently 2 (30, 25), planned 2 children
Space requirements on ground floor (GF) and upper floor (UF)
- GF: living room, kitchen, utility room, guest bathroom with shower, office
- UF: master bedroom with dressing room, bathroom, 2 children’s rooms, 1 hobby/storage/pantry room
Office: family use or home office? – home office
Overnight guests per year – negligible
Open or closed architecture – good mix, leaning towards open
Conservative or modern construction – rather conservative
Open kitchen, kitchen island – yes (or “half” island)
Number of dining seats – at least 6
Fireplace – not planned
Music/sound wall – not planned
Balcony/roof terrace – not planned
Garage, carport – yes, both
Utility garden, greenhouse – later
Other wishes/special features/daily routine, also reasons why some things should or should not be included – parents sleep on the east side, kitchen on the east side. Views to the east and south are completely unobstructed.
House design
Who designed the plan – planner from a construction company, based on our ideas
What do you particularly like? Why? – ground floor well realized, open entrance area, covered entrance as a solution combined with carport/garage, ample space, “south facade”
What don’t you like? Why? – upper floor not yet 100% right, children’s rooms are too different in size, gallery too large
Price estimate according to architect/planner – not yet available
Personal price limit for house, including equipment – 380k
Preferred heating technology – geothermal with underfloor heating
If you had to give up, which details/expansions
-you can give up: size of office, pantry, third room in UF (or size of that room)
-you cannot give up: bedroom with dressing room, office on ground floor, covered entrance
Why has the design ended up this way?
We told the planner our wishes (number of rooms on GF/UF, orientation of rooms). We gave no specifications about floor plans, room sizes, etc. He implemented our requirements based on that, which has mostly worked very well.
What is the most important/basic question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
1. Major flaws/general improvements?
2. Solution for UF to have nearly equal-sized children’s rooms?
2. Slope / Basement
How do you assess the slope situation on the plot? So far, we have not considered a basement necessary, but after the survey, we would like to check if it might make sense. Some areas would need to be filled, others excavated.
3. Files
Attached – all oriented to the north
Thanks in advance and best regards
I have been following this forum for a while and would like to introduce our project. We are still relatively at the beginning and plan to start at the end of next year. We have now received the first draft from a general contractor, with whom we will probably build.
1. Fundamentals:
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size – approx. 1200 m² (14,580 sq ft)
Slope – slight, see preliminary site plan
Site coverage ratio – no specification
Floor area ratio – no specification
Building envelope, building line and boundary – no specification
Edge development – no specification, 5 m (16 ft) wide strip on the east side
Number of parking spaces – no specification, 2 desired
Number of floors – 1 full story (Hesse)
Roof style – no specification
Architectural style – no specification
Orientation – main orientation north-south specified, approval for east-west orientation is available
Maximum height / limits – none
Other specifications – none
Requirements from the builders
Architectural style, roof type, building type – classic gable roof, 1.5 stories
Basement, number of stories – not planned, not necessary
Number of occupants, ages – currently 2 (30, 25), planned 2 children
Space requirements on ground floor (GF) and upper floor (UF)
- GF: living room, kitchen, utility room, guest bathroom with shower, office
- UF: master bedroom with dressing room, bathroom, 2 children’s rooms, 1 hobby/storage/pantry room
Office: family use or home office? – home office
Overnight guests per year – negligible
Open or closed architecture – good mix, leaning towards open
Conservative or modern construction – rather conservative
Open kitchen, kitchen island – yes (or “half” island)
Number of dining seats – at least 6
Fireplace – not planned
Music/sound wall – not planned
Balcony/roof terrace – not planned
Garage, carport – yes, both
Utility garden, greenhouse – later
Other wishes/special features/daily routine, also reasons why some things should or should not be included – parents sleep on the east side, kitchen on the east side. Views to the east and south are completely unobstructed.
House design
Who designed the plan – planner from a construction company, based on our ideas
What do you particularly like? Why? – ground floor well realized, open entrance area, covered entrance as a solution combined with carport/garage, ample space, “south facade”
What don’t you like? Why? – upper floor not yet 100% right, children’s rooms are too different in size, gallery too large
Price estimate according to architect/planner – not yet available
Personal price limit for house, including equipment – 380k
Preferred heating technology – geothermal with underfloor heating
If you had to give up, which details/expansions
-you can give up: size of office, pantry, third room in UF (or size of that room)
-you cannot give up: bedroom with dressing room, office on ground floor, covered entrance
Why has the design ended up this way?
We told the planner our wishes (number of rooms on GF/UF, orientation of rooms). We gave no specifications about floor plans, room sizes, etc. He implemented our requirements based on that, which has mostly worked very well.
What is the most important/basic question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
1. Major flaws/general improvements?
2. Solution for UF to have nearly equal-sized children’s rooms?
2. Slope / Basement
How do you assess the slope situation on the plot? So far, we have not considered a basement necessary, but after the survey, we would like to check if it might make sense. Some areas would need to be filled, others excavated.
3. Files
Attached – all oriented to the north
Thanks in advance and best regards
At least you can't say that the planner is trying to hide the inaccessibility of the walk-in closet.
The challenge of any design always lies in the details. But if our survey technician @Escroda is already talking about the need for a basement, then you can just toss the design in the trash.
There’s no need to discuss the details any further here.
The challenge of any design always lies in the details. But if our survey technician @Escroda is already talking about the need for a basement, then you can just toss the design in the trash.
There’s no need to discuss the details any further here.
First of all, thank you very much for the quick responses. I will try to address everything.
In the first step, I will respond to the points regarding the floor plan, and in the second step, I will address the topic of the slope.
1. Desired furniture: Okay, so far, standard furniture from the planner is included. Much is still unknown, as we are, as mentioned, just at the beginning. I will review it and compare it to what we currently have.
2. Pantry: We agree on that. From our perspective, we would simply like to remove the wall between the utility room and pantry and use the space for both purposes. Is there any reason against this?
3. Upper floor: We are not happy with this either – a new solution is needed here.
1. Budget: The general contractor says the budget is sufficient (for the house!).
2. Entrance dirt zone: Do you mean that the wardrobe is too far from the door? Yes, we don’t like that either. I would prefer it directly to the left of the door, where the guest WC currently starts.
3. Staircase direction: Another orientation is certainly possible – I would need to look at it in 3D. Off the cuff, I would say the entrance feels less cramped with the stairs in the current direction.
4/5. Guest WC/Pantry: We are also not satisfied here – a new solution is required. One idea might be as follows (including pantry and utility room combined).
6. “Wasted” space:
6.1 Open void at the staircase – we saw this in a model home and liked it a lot. But that is indeed a point that can be removed.
6.2 Bay window on the ground floor – that is because of our idea for a “reading nook by the window.” Something like:
7. Kitchen island: We have not planned anything concrete regarding the kitchen yet – we definitely need to do that.
8. Walk-in closet: Understood, another solution is needed here.
1. Staircase: The planner just inserted that; we have no preference. I think a larger staircase is certainly possible – is it sensible? See note about open void above.
2. Utility room on the upper floor: We are not happy with this either – a new solution is needed here.
3. Walk-in closet: Having it as a passage to the bedroom is definitely possible, then it could probably be larger. We will pass this on.
4. Upper-floor hallway: We are unhappy with this as well – a new solution is required.
5/6. Utility room and pantry: See above, we would combine them if there is nothing against it.
7/8. Path to the terrace and kitchen: You don’t have to walk around the table, which I find okay. But as said, nothing concrete is planned for the kitchen so far.
9. Bay window: See above.
10. Sofas: See above.
11. Study window: Understood, we will pass this on.
12. Front door: That’s not a problem, especially since no one will see the front door from the street due to the slope anyway.
13. Storage room at carport: Understood, we will pass this on.
In the first step, I will respond to the points regarding the floor plan, and in the second step, I will address the topic of the slope.
haydee schrieb:
Be sure to include your existing or desired furniture in the drawings.
The sofa is dollhouse-sized; the table with extended chairs requires much more space.
Not even a freezer fits in the pantry.
The upper floor definitely needs to be redone. Looks like too much space.
1. Desired furniture: Okay, so far, standard furniture from the planner is included. Much is still unknown, as we are, as mentioned, just at the beginning. I will review it and compare it to what we currently have.
2. Pantry: We agree on that. From our perspective, we would simply like to remove the wall between the utility room and pantry and use the space for both purposes. Is there any reason against this?
3. Upper floor: We are not happy with this either – a new solution is needed here.
-XIII- schrieb:
- Budget underestimated.
- The entrance dirt zone extends unnecessarily far into the house.
- Staircase direction is inconvenient, as the space under it cannot be used, for example, as a coat closet.
- Guest WC is uncomfortably narrow.
- Pantry is not usable in a meaningful way.
- Instead, there is wasted space use -> bay window, gallery, open void...
- Kitchen island is poorly dimensioned.
- Walk-in closet is far too narrow.
These were just the points obvious at first glance.
1. Budget: The general contractor says the budget is sufficient (for the house!).
2. Entrance dirt zone: Do you mean that the wardrobe is too far from the door? Yes, we don’t like that either. I would prefer it directly to the left of the door, where the guest WC currently starts.
3. Staircase direction: Another orientation is certainly possible – I would need to look at it in 3D. Off the cuff, I would say the entrance feels less cramped with the stairs in the current direction.
4/5. Guest WC/Pantry: We are also not satisfied here – a new solution is required. One idea might be as follows (including pantry and utility room combined).
6. “Wasted” space:
6.1 Open void at the staircase – we saw this in a model home and liked it a lot. But that is indeed a point that can be removed.
6.2 Bay window on the ground floor – that is because of our idea for a “reading nook by the window.” Something like:
7. Kitchen island: We have not planned anything concrete regarding the kitchen yet – we definitely need to do that.
8. Walk-in closet: Understood, another solution is needed here.
kbt09 schrieb:
I currently can’t really picture the house on the site.
What didn’t bother me are the differently sized kids’ rooms. They are almost identical in area. On the other hand, these points caught my attention:
- Really big house, but an extremely small staircase planned... and an open void I don’t understand the purpose of
- Huge utility room on the upper floor in the south/east, where supposedly the best view is... why not put a kids’ room there?
- Master bedroom should always be accessible through the walk-in closet
- Very large hallway on the upper floor
- Technical room and pantry are about 11 sqm (118 sq ft) ... with almost 5 sqm (54 sq ft) of circulation space where nothing can be placed due to passages
- Pantry only 115 cm (45 inches) deep ... no freezer or similar can fit because the door won’t open
- Route from kitchen to terrace goes around the peninsula and dining table before reaching the goal
- Kitchen has long walking distances
- What is the bay window on the ground floor for?
- Really only such small sofas?
- Window position on the west side of the study/guest room... no space for a closet there
- No one can see the front door from the street because it is behind a privacy wall
- Door of the storage area by the garage/carport is very poorly placed... cars should be planned so there is generous space on the driver’s side to get out, and the door positioned so one can safely walk past the car to store a bike or similar.
1. Staircase: The planner just inserted that; we have no preference. I think a larger staircase is certainly possible – is it sensible? See note about open void above.
2. Utility room on the upper floor: We are not happy with this either – a new solution is needed here.
3. Walk-in closet: Having it as a passage to the bedroom is definitely possible, then it could probably be larger. We will pass this on.
4. Upper-floor hallway: We are unhappy with this as well – a new solution is required.
5/6. Utility room and pantry: See above, we would combine them if there is nothing against it.
7/8. Path to the terrace and kitchen: You don’t have to walk around the table, which I find okay. But as said, nothing concrete is planned for the kitchen so far.
9. Bay window: See above.
10. Sofas: See above.
11. Study window: Understood, we will pass this on.
12. Front door: That’s not a problem, especially since no one will see the front door from the street due to the slope anyway.
13. Storage room at carport: Understood, we will pass this on.
Now about the slope.
We are aware that the plot is a bit more challenging, but to us (as laypeople) it doesn’t seem too extreme.
Let me first explain the background:
Our current plot used to be three small plots (see zoning plan):
1. 119/1
2. 119/2
3. 120
119/1 was a dead-end access from the street to the field path behind the plot. Neither the field path nor the dead-end access were/are in use, so we were able to buy the dead-end access from the municipality. Our idea was to use that former dead-end as a kind of driveway, since the other two plots are clearly above street level and otherwise would be hard to access.
119/2 and 120 were two building plots and have been combined. They are hardly visible from the street because they are situated well above street level and are hidden by the embankment. Behind the embankment there is a (to us as laypersons) gentle slope. According to the surveyor, it is 2.5m (8 feet) in diagonal over about 30 meters (100 feet) in width. The house is planned to be built up there (that’s our wish).
A picture is worth a thousand words:
1. The “somewhat” refers to the upper – let’s call it – plateau. Maybe “somewhat” is not quite right there, but it’s not 5m (16 feet).
2. By “short embankment” do you mean the one between 119/1 and 119/2? Just asking: Is having a lower ground floor recommended for the plot?
3. The general contractor is aware of the survey results. Whether this was taken into account in planning, I can’t say. We will discuss this.
4. The general contractor is based in Hessen and I specifically asked (because I didn’t want to believe it). But he confirmed again that one full story is fine.
1. Does the explanation above suffice? It is a field path, or simply grassland that has grown over, because it is not used.
2. What we will build with is still completely open.
3. Regarding the two-story height see above.
1. Dressing room: understood.
2. Throwing the design away? I don’t know. But yes, maybe it makes sense first to discuss recommendations for the plot.
We are aware that the plot is a bit more challenging, but to us (as laypeople) it doesn’t seem too extreme.
Let me first explain the background:
Our current plot used to be three small plots (see zoning plan):
1. 119/1
2. 119/2
3. 120
119/1 was a dead-end access from the street to the field path behind the plot. Neither the field path nor the dead-end access were/are in use, so we were able to buy the dead-end access from the municipality. Our idea was to use that former dead-end as a kind of driveway, since the other two plots are clearly above street level and otherwise would be hard to access.
119/2 and 120 were two building plots and have been combined. They are hardly visible from the street because they are situated well above street level and are hidden by the embankment. Behind the embankment there is a (to us as laypersons) gentle slope. According to the surveyor, it is 2.5m (8 feet) in diagonal over about 30 meters (100 feet) in width. The house is planned to be built up there (that’s our wish).
A picture is worth a thousand words:
Escroda schrieb:
That sounds modest. The plan shows a 5m (16 feet) height difference diagonally. In my opinion, modesty is misplaced here.
It wouldn’t be a basement, but a lower ground floor. Even a short embankment can accommodate an entire floor height. Plus there is a lateral slope. This will require a lot of planning.
How much do you plan to cut back? Where would you add fill? The terrain is “really extreme” and does not match the design at all. Did the general contractor know the site before starting the design?
Hopefully, they are aware of the full-story definition in Hessen, Germany. If the dashed line marks the 2m (6.5 feet) limit, I suspect the upper floor counts as a full story. The elevations are needed to know for sure.
1. The “somewhat” refers to the upper – let’s call it – plateau. Maybe “somewhat” is not quite right there, but it’s not 5m (16 feet).
2. By “short embankment” do you mean the one between 119/1 and 119/2? Just asking: Is having a lower ground floor recommended for the plot?
3. The general contractor is aware of the survey results. Whether this was taken into account in planning, I can’t say. We will discuss this.
4. The general contractor is based in Hessen and I specifically asked (because I didn’t want to believe it). But he confirmed again that one full story is fine.
11ant schrieb:
What worries me from a drainage perspective is the embankment sloping toward parcel 119. The latter seems to be an access path to a trail running between your planting strip and the (fields) on the right side of the plan. Is it a dike, a cycle path on an old railway route, or something similar?
What materials will you use – mixed walls, monolithic porous bricks for exterior walls, calcium silicate blocks for interior walls?
I share Escroda’s assessment of the terrain and concerns about the two-story height.
1. Does the explanation above suffice? It is a field path, or simply grassland that has grown over, because it is not used.
2. What we will build with is still completely open.
3. Regarding the two-story height see above.
ypg schrieb:
At least you can’t say the planner is hiding the inaccessibility of the dressing room.
The challenge of any design is always in the details. But if our surveyor @Escroda already talks about a necessary lower ground floor, then you can forget the current design.
There is no need to discuss details any further here.
1. Dressing room: understood.
2. Throwing the design away? I don’t know. But yes, maybe it makes sense first to discuss recommendations for the plot.
Aldo889 schrieb:
But it doesn’t look that extreme to us (as laypersons). OK. Let me ask differently: At what height should the top edge of the finished floor (top edge of the finished floor) be?
Here is the design on the plot:
If you want to keep the existing driveway mostly unchanged, the top edge of the finished floor would have to be at approximately 346.70 meters (1,137 feet). The existing ground at the bay window is 349.15 meters (1,145 feet), which means 2.45 meters (8 feet) or almost one full story below ground level.
The existing driveway has a slope of just over 6%, which is barrier-free, but it could easily be built up to 15%. Then the finished floor’s top edge could be one meter (3.3 feet) higher, at 347.70 meters (1,141 feet). Still a lot of earth to move to create a terrace on the south side.
So decouple the garage from the house. Then
Aldo889 schrieb:
What do you especially like? Why? - Ground floor well planned, open entrance area, covered entrance as a solution with carport/garage, enough space, would become irrelevant.
Aldo889 schrieb:
The house is also planned to be built up there (that’s our wish) Then a median finished floor height of 348.50 meters (1,144 feet)? The garden rises 1.30 meters (4.3 feet) over the 10 meters (33 feet) to the southern boundary. Feasible, but not insignificant. A staircase would be needed to the garage since at least 1.20 meters (4 feet), or even 2.20 meters (7.2 feet) with the unchanged driveway, would have to be overcome.
You see, there are many options, but the design as it stands will not work.
Aldo889 schrieb:
2. By short slope do you mean the one between 119/1 and 119/2? Yes, that one too, but especially the slope towards the street.
Aldo889 schrieb:
Is the issue of a basement on this plot a recommendation? Yes.
Aldo889 schrieb:
4. The main contractor is based in Hesse and I asked again because I couldn’t believe it. But he confirmed to me again that one full story is allowed. Good that he has that on his radar. I would be interested in the calculation. Perhaps the air space volume could be the key to the calculation method—something to keep in mind for redesign considerations.
Aldo889 schrieb:
But it doesn't look that extreme to us (as laypersons).That is often the problem. But your drawing sets the heights.
Escroda schrieb:
OK. So, let's try a different approach: At what height should the top edge of the finished floor (top of finished floor) be positioned?
Here is the design plan on the plot:
[ATTACH alt="Lageplan.png"]41218[/ATTACH]
If you want to keep the existing driveway mostly unchanged, the top of the finished floor would need to be around 346.70 meters (1,137 feet). The existing ground level at the bay window is 349.15 meters (1,145 feet), which means about 2.45 meters (8 feet) or almost one full story below ground level.
The current driveway has an accessible slope of just over 6%, but it could easily be built up to 15%. This would allow the top of the finished floor to be one meter higher, at around 347.70 meters (1,141 feet). Still, that would require moving a significant amount of earth to create a terrace on the south side. Okay, understood! That was our first idea. Basically, raise the driveway as much as possible and then cut into the area around the terrace, creating a two-level garden. But yes, that does seem like a lot of earthworks.
Separating the garage from the main house would be a compromise we would definitely consider. That could be an option to pursue. The garage would then be on the lower level, at the current driveway height, and the house above, connected by stairs. We will look into that in more detail.
Escroda schrieb:
Yes.
[ATTACH alt="Lageplan2.png"]41219[/ATTACH] Could you explain the idea a bit more? Where would the top of the finished floor be then? Would the garage and basement be at the same level?
The house would then sit quite far to the west. We would like to have the terrace/garden mostly on the south/west side (to enjoy the evening sun...). But it should also be easy to shift it towards the back, right?
I just had another thought regarding the basement. Would this be a good idea/feasible?
- Position garage and house as far northeast as possible
- Top of finished floor for the garage at the level of the current driveway (around 346.50 meters (1,136 feet))
- Basement with entrance area at the same level
- Entrance would then be in the basement, to the right in front of the garage
- Ground floor would have a top of finished floor at about 349.30 meters (1,145 feet), roughly aligned with the existing ground level at the bay window.
Of course, this would also require significant earthworks for the basement (which would have to be counted as a cellar...). On the plus side, the house could be smaller and less earth would need to be built up. We would have to add a basement level (which we can imagine housing the entrance area, utility room (currently planned on ground and upper floors), study (currently on ground floor), and possibly a guest bathroom).
Thanks a lot for your detailed answers — even over the holidays — that really helps and I’m glad I posted our project here.
ypg schrieb:
That is often the problem. But your drawings do define the heights. Yes, we are realizing that now. However, we only had the drawings and survey done after purchasing the plot.