ᐅ Location of a city villa or detached single-family house on a 500 m² rectangular plot
Created on: 17 Jan 2020 18:03
T
Tolentino
Dear all,
after sharing the floor plans of my possible hamster cage with you in the other thread , here comes the next thread (thanks again for all the constructive suggestions there).
Just so you know, the semi-detached house is not off the table yet, as this plot of land is highly sought after and it’s not clear whether it will work out. But this one would be my favorite.
Now to this plot. For now, I’m mainly concerned with where and roughly how the house should be positioned on this plot.
Development plan / restrictions
Plot size: 500 m² (5400 sq ft)
Slope: none
Site coverage ratio: 0.2
Floor area ratio: 0.4
Building envelope, building line and boundary: 5 m (16 ft) from the street, 3 m (10 ft) from neighbors
Edge development: allowed for garages and sheds, none existing on the plot
Number of parking spaces: 1-2
Number of floors: 1.5–2.5
Roof shape: no preference
Architectural style: no preference
Orientation: aligned parallel to the street
Maximum heights / limits: ridge height max. 9 m (30 ft)
Below are the site plans I created myself based on the details from the listing.
This is a rough overview of the plot with building boundaries and dimensions.
My question is: where to put the house?
The broker suggests placing it towards the back, since you already have the 5 m (16 ft) setback at the front and would “gain” about 3 m (10 ft) of garden. My partner doesn’t like this because of the visibility from the street. I say: privacy screen! But I also think, a fence too high might create a prison-yard feel.
But even if you follow this suggestion, I wonder if a more square floor plan (-> town villa style) would be better?
Like this, for example:
Then parking space might be tricky, right?
Or upright like this?
I really want as much of a west-facing view and garden as possible. I tend to be an evening person and that side is less built up, due to the road. So I think more light comes through.
But the narrow floor plan caused lots of problems with the semi-detached house already. Well, here you could build longer instead.
What do you think?
Best regards
Tolentino
after sharing the floor plans of my possible hamster cage with you in the other thread , here comes the next thread (thanks again for all the constructive suggestions there).
Just so you know, the semi-detached house is not off the table yet, as this plot of land is highly sought after and it’s not clear whether it will work out. But this one would be my favorite.
Now to this plot. For now, I’m mainly concerned with where and roughly how the house should be positioned on this plot.
Development plan / restrictions
Plot size: 500 m² (5400 sq ft)
Slope: none
Site coverage ratio: 0.2
Floor area ratio: 0.4
Building envelope, building line and boundary: 5 m (16 ft) from the street, 3 m (10 ft) from neighbors
Edge development: allowed for garages and sheds, none existing on the plot
Number of parking spaces: 1-2
Number of floors: 1.5–2.5
Roof shape: no preference
Architectural style: no preference
Orientation: aligned parallel to the street
Maximum heights / limits: ridge height max. 9 m (30 ft)
Below are the site plans I created myself based on the details from the listing.
This is a rough overview of the plot with building boundaries and dimensions.
My question is: where to put the house?
The broker suggests placing it towards the back, since you already have the 5 m (16 ft) setback at the front and would “gain” about 3 m (10 ft) of garden. My partner doesn’t like this because of the visibility from the street. I say: privacy screen! But I also think, a fence too high might create a prison-yard feel.
But even if you follow this suggestion, I wonder if a more square floor plan (-> town villa style) would be better?
Like this, for example:
Then parking space might be tricky, right?
Or upright like this?
I really want as much of a west-facing view and garden as possible. I tend to be an evening person and that side is less built up, due to the road. So I think more light comes through.
But the narrow floor plan caused lots of problems with the semi-detached house already. Well, here you could build longer instead.
What do you think?
Best regards
Tolentino
Tolentino schrieb:
For now, I’m just concerned about roughly where and how the house should be positioned on this plot. The plot isn’t tiny, and the building envelope isn’t restrictive either. You only need a single parking space (according to the zoning plan as well?), so why limit yourself on the house placement before you’ve even decided on the floor plan? Are you hoping this decision will be “the first stroke to break the writer’s block”?
Tolentino schrieb:
Yes, we have up to a 0.23 allowance for exceedance, according to the salesperson whose boss is supposedly a close friend of the planning officer. And if the approval needs to be passed on to her husband before the building permit / planning permission is granted, that little “private connection” won’t be worth anything.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Tolentino schrieb:
Right of way for walking, driving, and utilities, unfortunately.Does the neighbor also use this as an access road? In other words, is this strip paved or passable by car?
If so, this could give you the option to place your own parking space on the right side of the plan, toward the east or southeast.
I would suggest positioning the house closer to the street so that you still have a private, sheltered area at the back.
As shown in your middle image, place it as far up on the plan as possible but directly along the 5-meter (16 ft) line from the street.
This way, you would have a nice private area in the southeast garden behind the house and a wonderful large southwest garden beside the house with plenty of year-round evening sun.
Tolentino schrieb:
Edge development: permitted for garages and sheds. Not present on the property.
What exactly do you mean by that? What about the boundary to the southeast with the rear neighbor?
ypg schrieb:
So you can't place anything at the top of the plan, not even paving. No carport, no parking space.
That leaves you 8.30 meters (27 feet) width for the house after subtracting 5 meters (16 feet) parking depth.
So 8.30 x 12 meters (27 x 39 feet), if the authorities are lenient with the terrace because you plan or need little additional paving. I don’t fully understand the calculation.
The top of the plan is the 3-meter (10 feet) utility easement, but I can drive on it, right? I could turn in there and park parallel to the street in front of the house. The parking space needs a maximum of 3 meters (10 feet) width. So 21.3 meters (70 feet) minus 8 meters (26 feet) equals 13.3 meters (44 feet), right?
ypg schrieb:
The question is: can you afford the house? Not every house, but yes, including everything, there would still be 350k left.
11ant schrieb:
The plot isn’t tiny, nor is the building envelope very restrictive, you only need one parking space (also allowed by the development plan?), so why limit yourself before finalizing the floor plan where the house should go? — are you hoping this decision will “break your writer’s block” on the design? On the one hand exactly that, but on the other hand, I think the plot does influence the floor plan, especially with a front plot, its orientation, and the pedestrian, driveway, and utility rights... But if you say it’s basically very simple...
11ant schrieb:
And if she goes back to her husband before the building permit, that so-called “shepherd’s hour connection” is worthless. That’s not what I meant. “Buddy” is not an affair, right?
It was just a way of saying they probably know what is possible and what isn’t.
ltenzer schrieb:
Does the neighbor also use that as an access? So is this strip paved or drivable by car?
Then the option would exist to place your own parking space on the right side (east or southeast) of the plot. Yes. And I probably should have included the neighbors too. The utility easement is for the eastern (right side on the plan) neighbor. So I can’t put a parking space on that strip.
ltenzer schrieb:
I would place the house closer to the street so you still have a sheltered area at the back.
Not as far toward the top of the plan as in your middle picture, but directly on the 5-meter (16 feet) setback line from the street. Well, then I effectively lose 2 meters (6.5 feet) of continuous garden space.
What about privacy screening? I guess I can safely put up a 1.7-meter (5.5 feet) fence and a 2-meter (6.5 feet) hedge.
ltenzer schrieb:
You’d have a nice private area in the southeast garden behind the house and a lovely large southwest garden alongside the house, including plenty of year-round evening sun. But is that really still large with a 5-meter (16 feet) strip? Or am I misunderstanding you? Could you quickly sketch what you mean?
kaho674 schrieb:
What exactly do you mean? What about the boundary in the southeast toward the rear neighbor? The rear property is not yet developed or is scheduled for demolition.
So currently, there is no boundary structure on either plot. Boundary structures are generally allowed though.
Tolentino schrieb:
Yes. And I probably should have included the neighbors in the plan as well. The GFL regulation applies to the eastern neighbor (on the right side of the plan). So I can’t place a parking space on that strip. I didn’t mean parking on the strip, but rather using the strip itself as a driveway and parking behind the house. Because there you could create a paved parking space along the property boundary.
I roughly marked two white areas in the attachment as possible parking spots.
The advantage of the area behind the house is that you can officially designate it as a parking space and, for example, pave it.
With the option of a parking space in front of the house, this area would officially just be lawn; you could construct it with a reinforced grass surface (search for the term if not familiar) and simply park there once you have approval from the building authority (building permit/planning permission).
The building authority might also require you to officially designate parking spaces on your own property. One option would be to include the rear area in the building application but not actually develop it in reality...
Tolentino schrieb:
Well, then I would lose 2 meters of continuous garden area. You would only lose 2 meters of garden area if you planned your garden between the house and the street on the northwest side (!). I wouldn’t do that; it wouldn’t make sense for me when you have a large southwest-facing area next to the house. From a southwest terrace, you can also nicely view the summer sunset in the northwest sideways. During the other seasons, the sun sets in the southwest or west anyway. So a southwest-facing garden is perfect.
Tolentino schrieb:
But is a 5-meter (16 feet) strip really still large? Or am I misunderstanding you? Can you quickly sketch what you mean? You don’t just have one garden side. And how wide the rear garden strip will be depends on many factors since the floor plan is not yet finalized. There are countless people who would envy you a 5-meter (16 feet) southeast-facing garden, and for you, it would only be an additional area next to the large southwest garden, which even more people would envy.
With a total budget of 350k, you won’t get very far.
That leaves 300k for the house.
The expandable house Flair 148 has enough rooms, or the Lichthaus 152; in case of three children, the attic can be converted into a study.
Townhouse Flair 152 RE
However, when customizing, you won’t have much room for flexibility.
That leaves 300k for the house.
The expandable house Flair 148 has enough rooms, or the Lichthaus 152; in case of three children, the attic can be converted into a study.
Townhouse Flair 152 RE
However, when customizing, you won’t have much room for flexibility.
Similar topics