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
kbt09 schrieb:
Floor-to-ceiling height 275 cm (108 inches)? I completely missed that. That’s cute. But if you are fine with 2.50 m (98 inches), the staircase will be shorter. For a small house, I think that’s okay. But be careful, in larger rooms it can feel cramped quickly.
Tolentino schrieb:
Can you make the staircase shallower at the beginning and steeper at the end (after the turn)? Is that possible? No.
kbt09 schrieb:
Floor-to-floor height 275 cm (9 ft). That does not result in a clear ceiling height of 250 cm (8 ft 2 in), and Katja already pointed out the rest.Could you please show me the calculation? This is what the site manager said.
Tolentino schrieb:
Could you please run the numbers for me?
The site manager said it like that. The floor structure is probably missing here. We don’t know it yet because we don’t (yet) have your plans. Usually, 25cm (10 inches) refers to the bare concrete slab. What does the scope of work say about the thickness of the slab? Is there any information about it at all?
kbt09 schrieb:
No ... that won’t work. Irregular stair risers cause accidents.
And at the stair exit, you don’t have any extra space for another step anyway. Okay. You mean on the upper floor? Yes, the first room door is quite close. You could extend the "starting tread" (first step run), as there is a bit more space on the ground floor and upper floor.
kaho674 schrieb:
But if you are happy with 2.50m (8 ft 2 in), the staircase will be shorter. For a small house, I think that’s fine. But be careful, in larger rooms it can soon feel cramped. Well, I currently have 2.70m (8 ft 10 in) clear ceiling height in my condominium and so far I thought less wouldn’t work. But before the tightening of the COVID measures, we visited a show home park where two houses actually had only 2.50m (8 ft 2 in) clear ceiling height, one of them with a huge open-plan living area, and it didn’t feel cramped at all. We were surprised. So I guess it is possible if the alternative for higher ceilings would be that more area is taken up by the staircase…
kaho674 schrieb:
You’re probably missing the floor construction. We don’t know that yet because we haven’t seen your plans. 25cm (10 inches) is usually the raw slab. What does the scope of work say about the thickness of the ceiling? Does it say anything at all? Actually, he mentioned the floor construction during the planning meeting. Of course, I didn’t write it down. Why the ceiling? On the ground floor? There’s just plaster on it, right? I’ll check the scope of work…
Tolentino schrieb:
Why the ceiling? When calculating the stairs, the floor-to-floor height is sufficient. Assuming the floor construction is the same on the ground floor and the upper floor, the distance remains the same.
The floor-to-floor height is, as far as I know (please correct me if I’m wrong), the height from the top of the ground slab to the top of the ceiling. With 2.75 m (9 feet), you subtract the thickness of the ceiling plus the floor construction to find the ceiling height on the ground floor. Depending on the size of the house, the ceiling thickness varies between 20 to 30 cm (8 to 12 inches). If you assume 25 cm (10 inches) for the ceiling and 10 cm (4 inches) for the floor, you end up with a ceiling height of 2.40 m (7 feet 10 inches). That would be rather low.
Tolentino schrieb:
I’ll take a look at the construction specification... So, this is all I found:
Construction Specification"]
The ground floor ceiling is constructed with reinforced concrete (prefabricated concrete slab with steel reinforcement and concrete C25/30) according to structural engineering requirements, and the ceiling joints are sealed and skim coated (Q2).
[...]
A complete underfloor heating system with insulation is installed on the ground and upper floors.
[...]
All rooms on the ground and upper floors will have a floating screed (cement screed, thickness 65-75mm (2.5-3 inches)) including thermal and impact sound insulation according to applicable thermal and sound insulation regulations, with perimeter edge insulation strips around the rooms to prevent sound transmission and PE foil. The thermal conductivity group and insulation thickness are based on the requirements of the energy saving regulation and the thermal insulation verification. For level-access showers, the screed is omitted and will be adjusted by the tiler (slope adjustment).
[/QUOTE]
I was planning to install tiles on the ground floor and vinyl flooring on the upper floor.
Unfortunately, there are no very specific details. However, as mentioned, in the conversation we agreed on a clear ceiling height of 2.5–2.55 m (8.2–8.4 ft). Specifically, he calculated a floor structure height of 20-25cm (8-10 inches) on the ground floor. On the upper floor, about 10cm (4 inches) less because insulation on the slab is missing/unnecessary there.
[QUOTE="kaho674 schrieb:
To my knowledge (please correct me if I’m wrong), the story height is the dimension from the top edge of the floor slab to the top edge of the ceiling. Wow, that would be unusual. That’s not how I understood it, nor how the construction manager explained it when I specifically asked about the clear ceiling height on the ground floor with a rough construction height of 2.75 m (9 ft).
As I understand it, the intermediate ceiling comes on top of the external walls, which in turn rest on the floor slab. It wouldn’t make sense to measure the rough story height up to the top edge of the intermediate ceiling, at least not from a layman’s perspective.
Of course, for the staircase height, the top edge of the finished intermediate ceiling plus floor covering must be taken into account.
I will follow up on this, but maybe someone here can share how this is generally measured or defined?
Because I would not want less than 2.50 m (+/- 2.5 cm) (8.2 ft ± 1 inch) ceiling height on the ground floor.
Kind regards
Tolentino
Similar topics