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
H
hampshire18 Jan 2020 19:52It seems to me that you are planning to build your house in the "front yard" of an existing property. The space is tight, the conditions are subject to many restrictions, and I would not rely solely on the seller’s word. Without preliminary discussions with the building authority (planning office), I would not commit to anything. For these meetings, I would bring your preferred plan without trying to closely align it with the existing layout and start from there with a completely open mind.
hampshire schrieb:
The location is tight, the conditions are subject to many restrictions, and I wouldn’t rely solely on the word of a seller. For the OP’s plot, I don’t actually see any problems and would probably buy it if plots are as scarce as described. As Escroda mentions, there is probably still some potential for increasing the floor area ratio based on the neighboring buildings. I would have more doubts about the one at the back, though.
H
hampshire18 Jan 2020 20:06Or buy both and combine them – but it will impact the budget.
hampshire schrieb:
Or buy both and unite themThey are not even separate yet.
Escroda schrieb:
[...]
When the original poster mentions that certain rules must be followed, the question arises: who was consulted? All statements seem to be hearsay from a sales representative.That is correct. This is the head of sales at a homebuilding company that cooperates with the real estate agent for the plot. He has already brokered the rear subplot with a "terminable" developer obligation.
The front plot is still for sale without such a developer obligation, but since the rear one is already being built with them, there are synergies if I also build with them, which is why I accepted the invitation to talk.
Escroda schrieb:
The next question would be what influence on the planning and the land subdivision still exists. Initially, I was told it would definitely be possible to discuss exactly how the land is divided.
However, when I sent him the questions raised here by email, I received the same vague but fairly confident responses already mentioned here.
Escroda schrieb:
The following assumptions do not describe the worst case but provide a basis for discussion that, based on my interpretation of the original poster's situation, is likely:
[...]
We can forget everything we know about plot ratio I and plot ratio II. Hence also the rough permission to exceed the determined plot ratio of 0.2 by 15%. With a few well-reasoned arguments, a planner should be able to negotiate a higher value. This makes the plot ratio sensible even if the area is fully sealed. That doesn't sound bad at all. I also think, judging by the photos alone, the area is built more densely.
Escroda schrieb:
Since a shared driveway is usually a constant source of neighborly conflict, I advise against it, although I don’t think the seller will back down on that.I think they don’t really care as long as the two buyers agree. Since the rear buyer has already committed, it will be hard to convince him to change. The only leverage I have is to refuse to contribute to the demolition costs.
Escroda schrieb:
You would need to precisely question where the 0.2 comes from, who calculated it, and on what basis. But I believe a house of your size can be approved. Whether such detailed questions need to be asked at this stage depends on the sales agreement. Okay, I will inquire with the building authority.
Escroda schrieb:
I consider your plan from #24 to be the most reasonable solution, but with the outbuilding on the other side of the house. I would prefer a private driveway, so assigning the path entirely to the rear neighbor, but I see difficulties with the plot ratio and the seller.Thank you very much for your detailed explanation and assessment. It has helped me a lot.
Escroda schrieb:
Since there is no zoning plan, the ancillary buildings and paved areas do not count toward the plot ratio. Under §34, the plot ratio is roughly determined based on neighboring buildings, usually from aerial photographs or cadastral maps, if a local comparison has taken place (see new construction on neighboring plot).
Given the political will for densification, a plot ratio of 0.2 is nonsense anyway. Based on the photos, it is probably on average at least 0.3 here.
The entire factual situation should be verified with the approval authority.Will do. The 0.2 may come from the zoning plan immediately adjacent to this area. It ends basically at the street where the plot is located. According to the zoning plan’s justification, the purpose there is to preserve the character of a green, natural area. To the west, a small river runs along with a hiking trail and so on.
hampshire schrieb:
Or both buy and combine – but that goes over budget. You mean buying the entire plot and not splitting it.
I would be in at close to 500,000 EUR (around). Then I wouldn’t have any money left for the house. Of course, I could live in the existing building to be demolished...
No, unfortunately not an option.
What I consider crucial is that you do not rely solely on the statements of the building authority when calculating the floor area ratio, as this might unnecessarily limit you. Also, it’s worth remembering that you will most likely have to pay transfer tax on the house if you are building with the seller of the land.
Similar topics