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
Hausbau0815 schrieb:
Now I can follow you. But tell me, I keep hearing in this forum that for the money I pay, I should be getting better quality and craftsmanship, but honestly, what’s being built over there doesn’t look any better. And you’re definitely not paying just 900 € per square meter, right? Yes, I definitely thought of some of your pictures. My construction isn’t that far along yet, but I’m keeping an eye out for beer bottles behind the insulation and drywall...
My expert says it’s not pretty, but ultimately without defects if the mortar work is done properly. However, I’ve already told the site manager that I’m not satisfied.
ypg schrieb:
We always spoke directly with the tradesmen, including the bricklayer. I did that as well, but it ultimately wasn’t really successful. He also tried to tell me some nonsense, but in the end it was just a lack of motivation.
Well, if the structural engineer says it’s okay, then I accept it.
A small update. The general contractor can’t obtain the clearance certificate from the structural engineer. He claims that since I’m not her contractual partner but his, it’s unusual to get it from her. I’m getting the impression that they don’t want to officially acknowledge the poor workmanship of the masons under the risk of liability.
I’ve now used my legal protection insurance through the building authority and consulted a lawyer. He even considers an independent, privately commissioned expert report too risky, since in case of damage it wouldn’t be enforceable. It’s better to force the appointment of a court-ordered expert and then either enforce a reduction in value or demolition. Alternatively, to let construction continue for now and then refuse acceptance...
I’m quite discouraged right now. Why do they reveal themselves as such poor craftsmen who won’t even admit their mistakes and correct them.
Well, I will keep updating.
I’ve now used my legal protection insurance through the building authority and consulted a lawyer. He even considers an independent, privately commissioned expert report too risky, since in case of damage it wouldn’t be enforceable. It’s better to force the appointment of a court-ordered expert and then either enforce a reduction in value or demolition. Alternatively, to let construction continue for now and then refuse acceptance...
I’m quite discouraged right now. Why do they reveal themselves as such poor craftsmen who won’t even admit their mistakes and correct them.
Well, I will keep updating.
Tolentino schrieb:
A small update. The general contractor can’t obtain the clearance certificate from the structural engineer; he claims I’m not under contract with her, but with him, so this is unusual. No more unusual than a general contractor using a shell company argument.
Tolentino schrieb:
What I hear from that is that they don’t want to officially acknowledge the poor workmanship of the masons with a liability commitment. Then at least we are hearing the same thing.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Hausbau081518 Feb 2021 18:52Tolentino schrieb:
So it's better to insist on a court-appointed expert immediately and either enforce a reduction in value or dismantling. Alternatively, let the construction continue for now and then refuse acceptance...Forcing a court-appointed expert: Do you have any idea how long that takes? By the time it's resolved, it will be autumn.