Dear all, I have been following the discussions in this forum for some time and find the feedback on individual questions very helpful. We are building for the first time – with all the knowledge gaps that come with it… ;-)
Our plot is challenging because it is triangular, narrow, and has a requirement of 4m (13 feet) setbacks at the front building line and 20m (66 feet) to the tip. However, the orientation is great, and we have a beautiful distant view. We want to preserve as much garden space as possible and also enjoy an unobstructed view of nature and maximum sunlight – from sunrise to sunset. That’s why we are considering a partly “floating” living area on the upper floor with a terrace and access to the garden. Direct access from the ground floor to the garden is not a priority for us.
Due to building regulations, a large portion to the east remains undevelopable or possibly usable for outbuildings. Access is intended through this area, which will become the front garden. The house should be wheelchair accessible. The space should be used optimally, with plenty of storage, flexible, multifunctional rooms, and large floor-to-ceiling windows/doors or fixed glazing.
What do you think of our ideas? What weaknesses do you see?
Thanks in advance for any honest criticism and suggestions.
Development plan
Plot size – 590m2 (6350 sq ft)
Slight slope and southwest orientation
Maximum height – 8m (26 feet)
Client requirements
Clear lines, flat or shed roof
Floors – ground floor, upper floor, attic, total approx. 190m2 (2045 sq ft)
Occupants – 2 people in their prime and 2 dogs
Office: home office
Annual guest sleepers – 5 to 10
Open architecture
Construction method – modern design, clear and minimal shapes with interesting accents and deliberate contrasts that give the house a discreet uniqueness (facade, materials, etc.)
Open kitchen, possibly an island, but with some visual screening (bar or similar)
Number of dining seats – 8
Fireplace – ideally as a room divider between living and dining areas
Music/sound wall – soundbar at the TV, additional speakers distributed throughout the house
Balcony, roof terrace – on upper floor and attic
Carport for 2 cars
House design
Architect’s plan
Ground floor – entrance, utility rooms, fitness/work/guest room, bathroom & sauna
Upper floor – living, cooking & dining, close to nature, sunny, cozy, “public area,” terrace
Attic – bedrooms, sunny private retreat area, terrace
Garden – ideally visually extended, covered terrace, biotope near the terrace
What do you particularly like?
The open living-dining area on the first floor, the floor-to-ceiling windows, the path of the sun through the living area.
What do you not like?
We feel the room layout could be better, and maybe the same living feeling can be achieved with less square footage.
On the ground floor, only the sauna is shown; shower, sink, and toilet are still missing. The large room for fitness/work/guest use seems a bit oversized.
Preferred heating technology: geothermal probes and photovoltaic panels on the roof
Attachments: site plan, floor plans, exterior view
Our plot is challenging because it is triangular, narrow, and has a requirement of 4m (13 feet) setbacks at the front building line and 20m (66 feet) to the tip. However, the orientation is great, and we have a beautiful distant view. We want to preserve as much garden space as possible and also enjoy an unobstructed view of nature and maximum sunlight – from sunrise to sunset. That’s why we are considering a partly “floating” living area on the upper floor with a terrace and access to the garden. Direct access from the ground floor to the garden is not a priority for us.
Due to building regulations, a large portion to the east remains undevelopable or possibly usable for outbuildings. Access is intended through this area, which will become the front garden. The house should be wheelchair accessible. The space should be used optimally, with plenty of storage, flexible, multifunctional rooms, and large floor-to-ceiling windows/doors or fixed glazing.
What do you think of our ideas? What weaknesses do you see?
Thanks in advance for any honest criticism and suggestions.
Development plan
Plot size – 590m2 (6350 sq ft)
Slight slope and southwest orientation
Maximum height – 8m (26 feet)
Client requirements
Clear lines, flat or shed roof
Floors – ground floor, upper floor, attic, total approx. 190m2 (2045 sq ft)
Occupants – 2 people in their prime and 2 dogs
Office: home office
Annual guest sleepers – 5 to 10
Open architecture
Construction method – modern design, clear and minimal shapes with interesting accents and deliberate contrasts that give the house a discreet uniqueness (facade, materials, etc.)
Open kitchen, possibly an island, but with some visual screening (bar or similar)
Number of dining seats – 8
Fireplace – ideally as a room divider between living and dining areas
Music/sound wall – soundbar at the TV, additional speakers distributed throughout the house
Balcony, roof terrace – on upper floor and attic
Carport for 2 cars
House design
Architect’s plan
Ground floor – entrance, utility rooms, fitness/work/guest room, bathroom & sauna
Upper floor – living, cooking & dining, close to nature, sunny, cozy, “public area,” terrace
Attic – bedrooms, sunny private retreat area, terrace
Garden – ideally visually extended, covered terrace, biotope near the terrace
What do you particularly like?
The open living-dining area on the first floor, the floor-to-ceiling windows, the path of the sun through the living area.
What do you not like?
We feel the room layout could be better, and maybe the same living feeling can be achieved with less square footage.
On the ground floor, only the sauna is shown; shower, sink, and toilet are still missing. The large room for fitness/work/guest use seems a bit oversized.
Preferred heating technology: geothermal probes and photovoltaic panels on the roof
Attachments: site plan, floor plans, exterior view
akanezumi schrieb:
We had planned a large house (for 5 people) with a budget of 700k plus contingency, but it is now expected to cost at least 900,000.What were the main cost drivers for you? Are you still building as planned, or have you changed or omitted anything?
driver55 schrieb:
How are you currently living? Currently, in an apartment of about 130m² (1400 sq ft) with a lot of outdoor space, including approximately 80m² (860 sq ft) of terraces.We are 58 years old. At 35, we couldn’t have afforded to build a house.
Don’t worry, I have no intention of leaving you. 😉 I find the content-related comments very helpful. I will keep you updated...
A
akanezumi13 Aug 2022 23:46Sunny_OE schrieb:
What were the specific cost drivers in your case? Are you still building according to plan, or have you changed or omitted anything? Fortunately, the shell construction was agreed on early and started already in spring 2021. Since then, almost everything has become more expensive. Many things have been delayed, mainly due to COVID-19 and supply shortages. If a tradesperson can’t come, all later trades get pushed back. For example, the plasterer canceled after the third rescheduling. The replacement was then 20% more expensive… Insulation has also been a major cost driver. We now have to invest over €20,000 (about $22,000) more than planned.
Basically, almost everything has become more expensive than originally planned by our architect.
So far, we haven’t really cut anything. But we’re also (unfortunately) not finished yet. We’re lucky to be able to plan with quite a bit of buffer (which we haven’t told the architect about).
One consequence has been that we organize some things ourselves to ensure they happen on time (e.g., purchasing kitchen appliances, applying for subsidies). We don’t have the time (or experience) for DIY work, but I am currently building the photovoltaic system entirely myself. This saves about €10,000 (around $11,000) and allows me to avoid compromises.
i_b_n_a_n schrieb:
I trust both to keep this in mind! Also, a female architect (not a male architect) is a planner. … because the attentive homeowner learns that architects can apply several variations of cost calculation, and one of these only calculates in cubic meters, which often results in about 20–30% underestimation. For the HOAI fee structure, this is a useful method to prevent the client from withdrawing… after all, 200 m² (2,150 ft²) is not always equal to 200 m² (2,150 ft²)…
Sunny_OE schrieb:
Thanks, then, for the appeal not to discuss the budget any further. So I assume my questions will not be answered?
ypg schrieb:
… because the attentive homeowner learns that architects apply (or can apply) several types of calculations, and one of them only uses cubic meters, which often results in an underestimation of about 20-30%. For HOAI (the official fee structure), this is a good way to keep the client from backing out… because 200 square meters (about 2150 square feet) are not always equal to 200 square meters (about 2150 square feet)… but it can also have advantages.
Mine calculated the cubic meters of enclosed space at, I believe, €265 per cubic meter (265 euros). Because my project is around 1100 cubic meters (39,000 cubic feet), I stayed just under €300,000 (300,000 euros) – saving €700 (700 euros) on the surveying fee for the land registry office. In Lower Saxony, they add a hefty surcharge for anything over €300,000 (300,000 euros) 😀
Similar topics