ᐅ Single-family house of approximately 200 sqm with a double garage on a trapezoidal lot
Created on: 5 May 2023 15:45
M
Mucuc18
Hello dear house building forum community!
After carefully reading along for a while, I would now like to share our current design for constructive feedback.
Below are the usual details; south is at the bottom of the site plan:
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size | 512sqm (5509 sq ft)
Slope | No
Site coverage ratio | 160sqm (1722 sq ft) building footprint allowed for main building (+140sqm (1507 sq ft) overrun permitted for other structures)
Number of parking spaces | min. 1.5
Roof type | SD / WD or similar (mansard roofs are common in the area)
Maximum heights / limits | Ridge height 9.4m (31 ft) | Eaves height 6.5m (21 ft)
Additional requirements | Setbacks of 0.4 times the building height on two sides, 0.8 times the building height on other sides
Client Requirements
Architectural style, roof shape, building type | classic mansard-hipped roof, somewhat modern interpretation
Basement, floors | Ground floor, first floor, attic + basement
Number of occupants, ages | 2 (30 yrs, 33 yrs) + 1 (0 yrs) + occasional visitors
Space needs on ground floor, first floor | approx. 80–90sqm (860–970 sq ft) each for ground and first floors
Office | 1 office space needed for home office
Guest accommodation per year | to be determined, sometimes longer visits
Open or closed layout | rather open, but with adequate sound insulation and privacy
Conservative or modern construction | rather modern
Open kitchen, kitchen island | large open kitchen with island is important
Seating for dining | 4–6 seats regularly available, with option to extend
Fireplace | yes
Music / stereo wall | no, flexible hi-fi system
Balcony, roof terrace | no
Garage, carport | double garage
Utility garden, greenhouse | garden with beds and 2–3 trees, enclosed by hedge
House Design
Planner: architect & own ideas/drawings
What do you like most? Why? Separate parents’ floor, spacious open living area, straight staircase, number of rooms on first floor (flexibility), sufficient wardrobe space, staircase separated from living room
What do you dislike? Why? Location possibilities for heat pump outdoor unit, attic possibly has somewhat excessive space that might not be used efficiently (sloping ceilings)
Cost estimate by architect/planner: none so far
Budget for house including equipment: 1.4–1.5 million
Preferred heating technology: air-to-water heat pump
If you have to give up something, which details/features
- can be omitted: fireplace, pool, possibly double garage
- cannot be omitted: preferably a “large” garden
Why was the design developed this way? For example,
A mix of own ideas and architect’s input, along with several rounds of improvements over recent weeks. The main focus is on maintaining as much contiguous garden space as possible on a relatively small lot. Therefore, a setback on the east side is planned to comply with setbacks on the trapezoidal plot. The three floors plus basement help keep the house footprint small and separate the parents’ area from the children/guest area. We feel our wishes are well implemented in the current floor plan. Minor details such as window dimensions still need adjustment (e.g., equal-sized windows on the first floor west side, possibly a slightly larger sliding door on the ground floor, etc.).
What is the most important / basic question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
Do you see potential for improvement that we should consider or any no-gos we need to rethink? We are quite happy with the current status but appreciate input on aspects we may have overlooked or rationalized too optimistically.
Ground Floor
First Floor
Attic
Basement
Section
South Elevation
East Elevation
West Elevation
After carefully reading along for a while, I would now like to share our current design for constructive feedback.
Below are the usual details; south is at the bottom of the site plan:
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size | 512sqm (5509 sq ft)
Slope | No
Site coverage ratio | 160sqm (1722 sq ft) building footprint allowed for main building (+140sqm (1507 sq ft) overrun permitted for other structures)
Number of parking spaces | min. 1.5
Roof type | SD / WD or similar (mansard roofs are common in the area)
Maximum heights / limits | Ridge height 9.4m (31 ft) | Eaves height 6.5m (21 ft)
Additional requirements | Setbacks of 0.4 times the building height on two sides, 0.8 times the building height on other sides
Client Requirements
Architectural style, roof shape, building type | classic mansard-hipped roof, somewhat modern interpretation
Basement, floors | Ground floor, first floor, attic + basement
Number of occupants, ages | 2 (30 yrs, 33 yrs) + 1 (0 yrs) + occasional visitors
Space needs on ground floor, first floor | approx. 80–90sqm (860–970 sq ft) each for ground and first floors
Office | 1 office space needed for home office
Guest accommodation per year | to be determined, sometimes longer visits
Open or closed layout | rather open, but with adequate sound insulation and privacy
Conservative or modern construction | rather modern
Open kitchen, kitchen island | large open kitchen with island is important
Seating for dining | 4–6 seats regularly available, with option to extend
Fireplace | yes
Music / stereo wall | no, flexible hi-fi system
Balcony, roof terrace | no
Garage, carport | double garage
Utility garden, greenhouse | garden with beds and 2–3 trees, enclosed by hedge
House Design
Planner: architect & own ideas/drawings
What do you like most? Why? Separate parents’ floor, spacious open living area, straight staircase, number of rooms on first floor (flexibility), sufficient wardrobe space, staircase separated from living room
What do you dislike? Why? Location possibilities for heat pump outdoor unit, attic possibly has somewhat excessive space that might not be used efficiently (sloping ceilings)
Cost estimate by architect/planner: none so far
Budget for house including equipment: 1.4–1.5 million
Preferred heating technology: air-to-water heat pump
If you have to give up something, which details/features
- can be omitted: fireplace, pool, possibly double garage
- cannot be omitted: preferably a “large” garden
Why was the design developed this way? For example,
A mix of own ideas and architect’s input, along with several rounds of improvements over recent weeks. The main focus is on maintaining as much contiguous garden space as possible on a relatively small lot. Therefore, a setback on the east side is planned to comply with setbacks on the trapezoidal plot. The three floors plus basement help keep the house footprint small and separate the parents’ area from the children/guest area. We feel our wishes are well implemented in the current floor plan. Minor details such as window dimensions still need adjustment (e.g., equal-sized windows on the first floor west side, possibly a slightly larger sliding door on the ground floor, etc.).
What is the most important / basic question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
Do you see potential for improvement that we should consider or any no-gos we need to rethink? We are quite happy with the current status but appreciate input on aspects we may have overlooked or rationalized too optimistically.
Ground Floor
First Floor
Attic
Basement
Section
South Elevation
East Elevation
West Elevation
H
HeimatBauer3 Oct 2023 14:54Wugler1978 schrieb:
Beautifully summarized and really gives a reality check to a homeowner who’s still in the dark. (shaking head) As a homeowner, I would be very grateful for such a clear statement. When I built my house, I brought in a very close professional friend as an advisor, who first knocked all my unrealistic ideas out of my head and instilled basic construction principles in me. Today, I’m so glad I didn’t build the nonsense I had imagined.
In software development, there is a saying: “Fail fast.” That means identify and correct mistakes as early as possible! If I notice the mistake while it’s still just an idea, it only takes a few seconds to fix it. Once it’s drawn, it takes a few hours to correct. And so on. Once it’s built, correcting it is so complicated and costly that it usually doesn’t get fixed at all.
If I were to build a house again, I would definitely ask an 11ant or similar expert for exactly this kind of clear guidance. Simply because I want to save time, money, and nerves.
H
HeimatBauer3 Oct 2023 14:59Regarding the general contractor’s “architect.” Our contractor somehow adapted the design of the builder’s house to fit our wishes. Well, sort of. Almost. I think it was only the sixth draft that finally met our requirements — but we kept emphasizing compliance with the building regulations. Draft six was submitted to the municipality and immediately returned. After that, the contractor’s “architect” consulted a specialist to make the design compliant with building codes. That process took quite a while.
If I were to build again, I would either choose standard house models or hire a real architect. Without quotation marks.
If I were to build again, I would either choose standard house models or hire a real architect. Without quotation marks.
HeimatBauer schrieb:
Afterwards, the general contractor’s "architect" first brought in a specialist to make the design compliant with building regulations. It is questionable whether these individuals are actually architects in such cases. Not everyone authorized to produce drawings has completed an architecture degree. However, I can imagine that they are conveniently called architects by the general contractor for the layperson, in order to avoid further discussions.
Would it be too much to ask to see their diploma beforehand?
W
Wugler19783 Oct 2023 16:5311ant schrieb:
Exactly, another valuable push away from the wrong direction.
Why is that?
I am a consultant, not a masseur. My job is to advise building families well on their way to their own home. You're a great consultant!!! Pointing out after the child has fallen into the well that the well should have been secured so the child wouldn't fall in.
HeimatBauer schrieb:
As a builder, I would be very grateful for clear guidance. When I built my house, I got a very close professional friend as a consultant who first knocked all my unrealistic ideas out of my head and taught me the basic principles of construction. I’m glad for you—and for the consultant whose advice you accepted, even though it came from a good friend. I always comfort myself with the thought that it serves a good purpose—because it’s never easy to crush dreams, but it’s important, as land plots and especially building plots are not unlimited, and according to soil reports, they’re certainly not rose-colored clouds.
HeimatBauer schrieb:
Today, I’m really glad I didn’t build the junk I had imagined. What an inexperienced builder comes up with is usually not truly bad, and even a naive focus on the (in terms of relevance) wrong details is the bigger problem—but not really a serious one. The number one issue is the “fear of missing out,” which, combined with the toxic belief that “you only build once,” leads many owners to try to fit too many wishes into their small houses. That you “would have built junk” is exactly what your draftsman should never ever say to you under any circumstances. If you make mistakes planning yourself, the draftsman should rather flatter you by keeping them in, even if they cause awkward tight spots (“once you are a queen, you won’t need to walk much anyway”).
HeimatBauer schrieb:
If I ever build another house, I would indeed ask someone like 11ant for exactly this kind of straightforward advice. Simply because I want to save time, money, and nerves. Good planning saves a lot of nerves and time, yes. Money, only a little, even though every mistake costs twice—once when made and once when corrected. Honestly, well-advised building isn’t cheaper, just “less expensive.” Although, yes, for some lessons learned, you could have already purchased a single garage or a small conservatory.
HeimatBauer schrieb:
About the general contractor’s “architects.” Ours somehow tailored the general contractor’s house to our wishes. Sort of. Almost. I think only by the sixth draft did we get it right—although we repeatedly referred to the building regulations. Draft six went to the local authority and was immediately returned. Then the general contractor’s “architect” brought in an expert to make the design compliant with building codes. That took a while. To give the general contractor’s “architects” credit, quite a few first drafts (before the homeowners tried squeezing in a children’s bathroom or similar) were better than the eventually butchered final version, and building permits often stumble and fail due to excessive knee walls, dormers, and the like. Not everything the draftsman does is bad—he just shouldn’t talk the client out of such a design. The “hot potato” is better placed with the building authority.
HeimatBauer schrieb:
If I were to build again, I would either really choose standard house designs or hire an architect. Without quotation marks. No, please choose a proven design and an architect. It’s admittedly a complex case not contemplated by fee regulations, but still the best combination.
K a t j a schrieb:
One may doubt that these are genuinely architects in such cases. Not every person authorized to create drawings has an architecture degree. But I can imagine that from the general contractor’s perspective, they are gladly called architects to avoid discussions.
Would it actually be too bold to ask to see the diploma beforehand? That wouldn’t be bold, but it’s not necessary either. A building permit applicant who is a master mason or master carpenter is often even more valuable to the builder than a freshly graduated architect (the latter are the CAD generation to whom the construction world owes many botched jobs). And I know a very good orthopedic doctor who earned his doctorate in natural sciences rather than classical medicine. The habit of respectfully calling those who prepare building permit documents architects, even if they are actually draftsmen, is a habit of builders, not the general contractor. Most contract architects are female architects working part-time while raising children (who are then hired or contracted by the general contractor) or architects close to retirement for whom running their own office no longer pays off. It is only rarely due to the quality of education or experience that expectations here need to be lowered compared to when one finds and commissions an architect proactively.
Wugler1978 schrieb:
You’re a great adviser! After the child has fallen into the well, you point out that the well should be secured so the child doesn’t fall in. That’s nonsense. I always honestly say that water only boils at 100 degrees Celsius (212°F) for me too. So definitely not super, just thorough, honest, experienced, and admittedly conservative in the sense of “not a fashion maniac” and “when in doubt, rather cautious.” I certainly did not recommend a kamikaze approach of first testing the draftsman’s planning approach. I earn my living with people who cannot afford to waste their borrowed money on painful learning.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
What I don’t understand is this combination:
How did it come about that you went with a GC “architect” despite having a good advisor?
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
HeimatBauer schrieb:
When I built, I brought in a very close professional friend as an advisor who first helped me get rid of all my unrealistic ideas and taught me the basic principles of construction.
HeimatBauer schrieb:
Regarding the general contractor (GC) “architect”: ours somehow adapted the GC house to our wishes. Sort of. Almost. I think it wasn’t until the sixth draft that we were satisfied – but we kept referring to the building regulations/planning permit. Draft six went to the municipality and was immediately sent back. After that, the GC “architect” first consulted a professional to make the design compliant with building regulations. That process took a while.
How did it come about that you went with a GC “architect” despite having a good advisor?
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Similar topics