ᐅ Single-family house with a granny flat/apartment, 120 sqm plus a finished basement on a hillside
Created on: 10 Oct 2020 14:51
D
DJOchen
Hello everyone,
We have already gone through several designs, but there was always something unsatisfactory. Now we have completely revised everything and actually find it quite well suited to our needs. However, we’ve become a bit blind to it by now, so we would appreciate constructive criticism and opinions on the design. It is important to us to have a square floor plan (due to energy efficiency and the ratio of space to walls). We consider 9x9 m (30x30 ft) to be realistic.
Development plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 616 m² (6,630 sq ft)
Slope: yes, about 15% gradient
Site coverage ratio: 0.4
Floor area ratio: 0.8
Building zone, neighboring buildings: 3 meters (10 ft) distance to neighbors and to the street, 1.5 meters (5 ft) to the street on the east side
Boundary development: Garage/carport must fit within the building zone
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of floors: 1.5 floors, basement allowed as full floor
Roof type: gable roof or hip roof
Architectural style: rather modern
Orientation: see floor plan
Maximum height / limits: knee wall height 75 cm (30 inches), eaves height toward street max. 6.50 m (21 ft 4 in)
No further requirements
[B]Owners’ requirements
Style, roof type, building type: gable roof
Basement, floors: basement + 1.5 floors
Number of persons: currently 2 adults (37+30 years old) and 1 child, future additional child
Space demand ground floor and upper floor: total 120 m² (1,290 sq ft)
Office: family use or home office: one office for home office
Overnight guests per year: few
Open or closed architecture: closed
Conservative or modern construction: doesn’t matter, preferably a KFW energy-efficient house
Open kitchen, cooking island: closed kitchen
Number of dining seats: 6
Fireplace: not essential but would be nice
Music / stereo wall: yes
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: yes, double carport
Utility garden, greenhouse: no
[B]House design
By whom is the design created: by us
What do you particularly like? Why? Sauna included. Apartment for additional KFW subsidy fits in. Office as well. Front door on the upper level is very important due to earthworks. Bathrooms are large enough.
What do you not like? Kitchen not easily accessible, upstairs hallway too large, a lot of earthworks needed for basement door.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: not yet available
Personal price limit for house including equipment: without additional costs and land: 330,000 EUR
Preferred heating technology: geothermal with photovoltaic preparation
If you have to do without, which details/features
- can you do without: reduce size
- cannot do without: sauna, office and front door side
Why is the design the way it is now: as efficient use of space as possible and as little frills such as bay windows or recesses as possible. We want to build cost-effectively.
Which corresponding wishes were implemented by the architect? Architect not involved yet
What do you think makes it particularly good or bad? Good: efficient use of space, earthworks kept at a manageable level. Not good: kitchen access, window arrangement and window sizes
[B]What is the most important/fundamental question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
Is the layout and size good? How can windows be arranged effectively? What have we missed? What works well and should definitely stay?
[/B]
We have already gone through several designs, but there was always something unsatisfactory. Now we have completely revised everything and actually find it quite well suited to our needs. However, we’ve become a bit blind to it by now, so we would appreciate constructive criticism and opinions on the design. It is important to us to have a square floor plan (due to energy efficiency and the ratio of space to walls). We consider 9x9 m (30x30 ft) to be realistic.
Development plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 616 m² (6,630 sq ft)
Slope: yes, about 15% gradient
Site coverage ratio: 0.4
Floor area ratio: 0.8
Building zone, neighboring buildings: 3 meters (10 ft) distance to neighbors and to the street, 1.5 meters (5 ft) to the street on the east side
Boundary development: Garage/carport must fit within the building zone
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of floors: 1.5 floors, basement allowed as full floor
Roof type: gable roof or hip roof
Architectural style: rather modern
Orientation: see floor plan
Maximum height / limits: knee wall height 75 cm (30 inches), eaves height toward street max. 6.50 m (21 ft 4 in)
No further requirements
[B]Owners’ requirements
Style, roof type, building type: gable roof
Basement, floors: basement + 1.5 floors
Number of persons: currently 2 adults (37+30 years old) and 1 child, future additional child
Space demand ground floor and upper floor: total 120 m² (1,290 sq ft)
Office: family use or home office: one office for home office
Overnight guests per year: few
Open or closed architecture: closed
Conservative or modern construction: doesn’t matter, preferably a KFW energy-efficient house
Open kitchen, cooking island: closed kitchen
Number of dining seats: 6
Fireplace: not essential but would be nice
Music / stereo wall: yes
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: yes, double carport
Utility garden, greenhouse: no
[B]House design
By whom is the design created: by us
What do you particularly like? Why? Sauna included. Apartment for additional KFW subsidy fits in. Office as well. Front door on the upper level is very important due to earthworks. Bathrooms are large enough.
What do you not like? Kitchen not easily accessible, upstairs hallway too large, a lot of earthworks needed for basement door.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: not yet available
Personal price limit for house including equipment: without additional costs and land: 330,000 EUR
Preferred heating technology: geothermal with photovoltaic preparation
If you have to do without, which details/features
- can you do without: reduce size
- cannot do without: sauna, office and front door side
Why is the design the way it is now: as efficient use of space as possible and as little frills such as bay windows or recesses as possible. We want to build cost-effectively.
Which corresponding wishes were implemented by the architect? Architect not involved yet
What do you think makes it particularly good or bad? Good: efficient use of space, earthworks kept at a manageable level. Not good: kitchen access, window arrangement and window sizes
[B]What is the most important/fundamental question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
Is the layout and size good? How can windows be arranged effectively? What have we missed? What works well and should definitely stay?
[/B]
Thank you very much for the helpful advice. I will now go back into the development phase and get back to you with a revised draft. I probably won’t be able to implement everything (like a larger living room) since we unfortunately have a limited budget and therefore limited square meters available, but I’ll see what can be done. I have already largely revised the furniture sizes (sofa, parents’ wardrobe, table, washbasin), and I will take another look at the stairs. The granny flat is being removed, the sauna will be moved downstairs, the sofa will be rearranged, and the whole layout will include dimension chains and a terrace/carport in the floor plan. I hope you can assist me again with advice then; the ideas so far have definitely been very helpful!
ypg schrieb:
What do you mean by earthworks? Could the house collapse or slide? What does the soil report say?By earthworks, I mean excavation and transportation of soil. That can get very expensive, so we want to keep it as minimal as possible. That’s why we need the basement. However, I am currently considering a utility-only basement. That should significantly ease the financial burden.
DJOchen schrieb:
By earthworks, I mean excavation and transport. That gets very expensive, so we wanted to keep it as minimal as possible. For that, we need the basement. However, at the moment I am considering a purely usable basement. That should significantly ease the finances.Then plan without a traditional basement and build a lower ground floor – usable space including a sauna in the lower ground floor, and living space where the floor level is exposed. Show us a cross-section of the plot and tell us where the street and slope are. So a good site plan with elevation details or a section. You can save a lot of money by foregoing a conventional basement.
ypg schrieb:
Then plan without a basement and build a lower ground floor – usable space including sauna in the lower ground floor, and living area where the floor extends out.
Show us a cross-section of the plot and tell us where the road and slope are. So a clear site plan with elevation details or a section. You can save a lot of money by skipping a conventional basement. You can find the plot in the file "Grundriss" in the original post, where both streets are marked in gray. The house with terrace and carport is also shown. The drawing is oriented to the north. From the elevations, you can see the terrain profile: once the actual and once the planned sloped profile. Admittedly, it’s not obvious at first glance and lacks elevations, but it should hopefully help give an initial impression. The land rises toward the north.
Hello everyone,
attached is the revised design, hoping it will be received a bit better than version 1.
A brief summary of the main changes: only a utility basement, no granny flat, sauna upstairs, staircase changed. See below for all other details.
I look forward to all your comments.
Here is the updated to-do list with the origin of the feedback, where possible:
General:
Basement: This is now purely a utility basement. It might even be possible to only partially basement the building, but I’m not sure if it’s worth it since a slab foundation is still required and there could be a weak point at the transition between the basement and the slab-only area...
Terrain slope: This is shown in the elevation view; I don’t have any photos.
Location: This is visible in the floor plan. The floor plan is oriented to north.
@ haydee:
Granny flat: Removed entirely.
Furniture size: Done; the sizes now match our current furniture.
From where do you access the carport: See the floor plan.
Dimensions: I have added them.
Storage rooms: With the utility basement, we have enough storage to compensate for smaller ancillary rooms.
@ Hampshire:
Walkway from kitchen to entrance: Optimized with an open kitchen.
Piping for wet areas: Bathrooms are stacked, so hopefully better organized now.
Office location: It is now central. Small... but central.
@ Nice-Nofret
Ancillary rooms too small: Thanks to the utility basement, we have sufficient storage to balance out the size of the ancillary rooms.
@ ypg
Living room: Now over 4 m (13 feet) wide.
Terrace: See floor plan.
Bathroom: One small bathroom is enough for us; no more than one person should use it at the same time. (Tested in our current apartment with a significantly smaller bathroom.)
Staircase: The small spiral staircase has been removed and replaced by a larger, straight staircase.
Bedroom closet: Now matches our current closets.
Sink in the WC: Now larger.
@ hanse987:
For me, the kitchen belongs to the terrace: For us, the terrace connected to the living room makes sense and has proven successful in the past.
Walkways: I hope I have now respected the traffic areas but would appreciate a critical review.
Many thanks in advance for your help!
attached is the revised design, hoping it will be received a bit better than version 1.
A brief summary of the main changes: only a utility basement, no granny flat, sauna upstairs, staircase changed. See below for all other details.
I look forward to all your comments.
Here is the updated to-do list with the origin of the feedback, where possible:
General:
Basement: This is now purely a utility basement. It might even be possible to only partially basement the building, but I’m not sure if it’s worth it since a slab foundation is still required and there could be a weak point at the transition between the basement and the slab-only area...
Terrain slope: This is shown in the elevation view; I don’t have any photos.
Location: This is visible in the floor plan. The floor plan is oriented to north.
@ haydee:
Granny flat: Removed entirely.
Furniture size: Done; the sizes now match our current furniture.
From where do you access the carport: See the floor plan.
Dimensions: I have added them.
Storage rooms: With the utility basement, we have enough storage to compensate for smaller ancillary rooms.
@ Hampshire:
Walkway from kitchen to entrance: Optimized with an open kitchen.
Piping for wet areas: Bathrooms are stacked, so hopefully better organized now.
Office location: It is now central. Small... but central.
@ Nice-Nofret
Ancillary rooms too small: Thanks to the utility basement, we have sufficient storage to balance out the size of the ancillary rooms.
@ ypg
Living room: Now over 4 m (13 feet) wide.
Terrace: See floor plan.
Bathroom: One small bathroom is enough for us; no more than one person should use it at the same time. (Tested in our current apartment with a significantly smaller bathroom.)
Staircase: The small spiral staircase has been removed and replaced by a larger, straight staircase.
Bedroom closet: Now matches our current closets.
Sink in the WC: Now larger.
@ hanse987:
For me, the kitchen belongs to the terrace: For us, the terrace connected to the living room makes sense and has proven successful in the past.
Walkways: I hope I have now respected the traffic areas but would appreciate a critical review.
Many thanks in advance for your help!
Similar topics