We plan to build on a plot of land in Brandenburg, south of Potsdam.
Plot Information
The plot is currently mostly covered with pine trees, some of which are around 100 years old, along with a few yews, oaks, and bushes. The area has been unmanaged for at least 50 years. At least the rear third (northeast area) is intended to remain forested, as part of the adjacent larger woodland.
The plot is oriented approximately northeast â southwest.
Street access is on the southwest side (bottom of the plan). At this end of the plot, there are a few very tall pines with some yews and an oak in between. The oak is not very old but is an interesting multi-stem tree. I want to preserve this green screen, which will likely be challenging since construction vehicles require a certain size and height.
On the southeast side (right on the plan) there is an overly large and mostly unattractive boundary structure (garage and shed), which is not very appealing.
The neighboring plots on the northwest side (left on the plan) together have a similar amount of boundary structures but less intrusive and located further towards the top of the plan. Overall, the northwest side is greener because the neighboring buildings are set further back from the property boundary.
Development Plan / Restrictions
There is no formal development plan, but local regulations set general rules, such as ridge height, setback distances, and garage roof shape. If these are specified anywhere, floor area ratio and plot ratio probably only play a theoretical role for this project and plot size.
Plot size: >2000m² (21,528ft²)
Slope: none
Floor area ratio unknown
Plot ratio unknown
Building window, building line, and boundary >3m (10ft) setback
Outbuildings allowed along boundary
Number of parking spaces not specified
Number of storeys not specified
House roof shape: roof pitch 25°â50°, excluding roof extensions
Garage: gable roof facing street
Architectural style: no specific requirements
Orientation: gable end or eaves aligned to street
Maximum heights/restrictions: ridge height max. 9.0m (30ft)
Other specifications: ground floor top edge max. 80cm (2.6ft)
Client Requirements
Architectural style, roof type, building type: gable roof
Orientation: photovoltaic panels on the south-facing roof side, gable end facing street
Basement, storeys: basement + ground floor + first floor
Number of occupants, ages: 3+1, ages 17â55+
Space requirements on ground floor, first floor:
Ground floor: living room, kitchen, dining area, guest bathroom
First floor: bedrooms, bathroom
Two additional rooms on ground floor or first floor
Office: mainly home office for one person
Guests per year: 1 (about 20 extended weekends)
Open or closed architecture: window-obscuring bathroom and bedroom doors
Conservative or modern style: conservative
Preferred construction method: solid gas concrete blocks (e.g. Ytong or similar)
Open kitchen with cooking island: semi-open, preferably with (half) island
Number of dining seats: 4 (expandable to 8)
Fireplace: yes
Music/stereo/TV wall: rather simple / stereo system yes, no built-in wall unit / large screen
Balcony/roof terrace: balcony yes / roof terrace no
Garage/carport: garage
Utility garden, greenhouse: garden yes, greenhouse later
Additional Requests / Special Features / Daily Routine, including reasons why certain things are wanted or not:
The plot is quite narrow at just under 20m (65ft) wide for my desired house, which includes a partially integrated side double garage and a large sunny southwest terrace, so the best compromise must be found.
Due to the tall trees on the southwest, we expect western sun only during summer. Also, two neighborâs pine trees cast shade from the south on the likely building site.
When not sleeping, we mainly live on the ground floor, so this has planning priority. The kitchen is an important room, so we prefer a (semi-)open connection to the living room. At least one of us regularly works from home, so a suitable workstation is necessary, but a dedicated home office room is not essential.
Light is important in the living area (kitchen and living room), so we want the top edges of the windows to be as high as possible with roller shutters.
The fireplace is a 95% must-have as a supplementary heat source (and hopefully a cozy feature). Good positioning is a priority, but if possible, weâd like a water-carrying fireplace connected to a buffer tank and/or an additional hot water heating circuit for the bathrooms (e.g., large towel radiators). A ground heat load is planned via an air-to-water heat pump for underfloor heating. Additionally, air conditioning is planned in the master bedroom and childâs room 1.
A central ventilation system is probably too expensive.
The master bedroom should accommodate a double bed and a row of wardrobes.
Childâs room 1 will still serve as a youth room for a few years, later becoming a second bedroom (due to reported nighttime noise of uncertain cause).
The multi-purpose room is not yet definitively assigned: either home office or utility room with space for washing machine and dryer, or storage room.
Preferred room orientations (due to morning sun): kitchen, bathroom, and bedroom facing the garden.
The gable end facing the street seems sensible since photovoltaics are planned on the roof, and the south-facing side (+/- 30°) is expected to have the least shading.
My wifeâs wish for a balcony on the bedroom is âbecause it looks better.â
If built, we would like access to the balcony from the bedroom and the bathroom.
A basement is a 95% must-have due to various hobbies requiring significant space and tools. Also, all technical equipment is planned to be located in the basement.
A garage is essential (as large as possible for 1â2 cars, bicycles, and garden tools), but the house has higher priority. If necessary, the garage can be built later and/or an additional carport added on the street side, or even an underground garage (a small dream).
We now consider a connecting door between house and garage impractical. With the entrance on the gable side, the path is short and convenient anyway.
Gas concrete as preferred wall material was chosen because of its combination of easy handling during shell construction (which tends to avoid the common poor work that can cause thermal bridges), very good sound insulation, pleasant indoor climate, minor advantages during interior finishing, and previous DIY experience with the material. It is also non-combustible, avoids producing large amounts of hazardous waste, and structurally the walls are not potential habitats for insects or small rodents.
House Design
Design origin: by me
-Not designed by a construction company planner yet
-Architect is being sought
-Do-it-yourself approach: yes (reading, trying, thinking, reading, trying, ...)
What do you especially like? Why?
Entrance on street side (front view preferred over side entrance)
Layout of kitchen, bathroom, bedrooms
Kitchen with large work surface, appliance space, and storage
Sauna in the bright bathroom
Bright living room with fireplace
Hallways on ground and first floors and staircase with daylight
Coatroom near entrance (though small)
Small but fully functional guest WC on ground floor
What do you dislike? Why?
Costs likely at the budget limit
Easy access to attic not resolved
Attic usage not finalized
Little distance to right side property boundary
Relatively large hallway areas
Living area (according to CAD program): 135m² (EG 71m², OG 64m²) (1453ft² total; ground floor 764ft², first floor 689ft²)
Estimated price per architect/planner: unknown but would like to know
Personal price limit for the house, including equipment: 550,000 EUR
Personal preferred heating technology: oil/gas (more independent under various situations) and fireplace
Most likely heating system realistically planned: air-to-water heat pump (for various reasons) + fireplace
Possibly additional split air conditioners in master bedroom and childâs room 1
If you have to forgo something, which details or extensions
-can be omitted: balcony, double garage, finished attic
-cannot be omitted: light
Why is the design the way it is now?
The design is one of the results of two years of reading, viewing, own experiences, consideration, and experimentation. There are now many design variants; four or five are basically acceptable to us, each with different pros and cons.
This is one of the options with the smallest living area. I transferred it into a mediocre (very stubborn) CAD system because it provides automatic dimensioning. The system also helps my 3D spatial imagination (e.g., stairs under roof slope, walls stacked, first-floor windows within the building volume, roof in general).
Many details are not finalized yet (e.g., stair to attic, windows, âŚ) because of my lack of knowledge and experience. Also, some window and door types are simply not available in the CAD program; others are stubbornly displayed incorrectly.
The furniture layout shown is currently the best idea, but there are certainly better options (e.g., for the bathrooms).
Thank you in advance for your suggestions and help.
Plot Information
The plot is currently mostly covered with pine trees, some of which are around 100 years old, along with a few yews, oaks, and bushes. The area has been unmanaged for at least 50 years. At least the rear third (northeast area) is intended to remain forested, as part of the adjacent larger woodland.
The plot is oriented approximately northeast â southwest.
Street access is on the southwest side (bottom of the plan). At this end of the plot, there are a few very tall pines with some yews and an oak in between. The oak is not very old but is an interesting multi-stem tree. I want to preserve this green screen, which will likely be challenging since construction vehicles require a certain size and height.
On the southeast side (right on the plan) there is an overly large and mostly unattractive boundary structure (garage and shed), which is not very appealing.
The neighboring plots on the northwest side (left on the plan) together have a similar amount of boundary structures but less intrusive and located further towards the top of the plan. Overall, the northwest side is greener because the neighboring buildings are set further back from the property boundary.
Development Plan / Restrictions
There is no formal development plan, but local regulations set general rules, such as ridge height, setback distances, and garage roof shape. If these are specified anywhere, floor area ratio and plot ratio probably only play a theoretical role for this project and plot size.
Plot size: >2000m² (21,528ft²)
Slope: none
Floor area ratio unknown
Plot ratio unknown
Building window, building line, and boundary >3m (10ft) setback
Outbuildings allowed along boundary
Number of parking spaces not specified
Number of storeys not specified
House roof shape: roof pitch 25°â50°, excluding roof extensions
Garage: gable roof facing street
Architectural style: no specific requirements
Orientation: gable end or eaves aligned to street
Maximum heights/restrictions: ridge height max. 9.0m (30ft)
Other specifications: ground floor top edge max. 80cm (2.6ft)
Client Requirements
Architectural style, roof type, building type: gable roof
Orientation: photovoltaic panels on the south-facing roof side, gable end facing street
Basement, storeys: basement + ground floor + first floor
Number of occupants, ages: 3+1, ages 17â55+
Space requirements on ground floor, first floor:
Ground floor: living room, kitchen, dining area, guest bathroom
First floor: bedrooms, bathroom
Two additional rooms on ground floor or first floor
Office: mainly home office for one person
Guests per year: 1 (about 20 extended weekends)
Open or closed architecture: window-obscuring bathroom and bedroom doors
Conservative or modern style: conservative
Preferred construction method: solid gas concrete blocks (e.g. Ytong or similar)
Open kitchen with cooking island: semi-open, preferably with (half) island
Number of dining seats: 4 (expandable to 8)
Fireplace: yes
Music/stereo/TV wall: rather simple / stereo system yes, no built-in wall unit / large screen
Balcony/roof terrace: balcony yes / roof terrace no
Garage/carport: garage
Utility garden, greenhouse: garden yes, greenhouse later
Additional Requests / Special Features / Daily Routine, including reasons why certain things are wanted or not:
The plot is quite narrow at just under 20m (65ft) wide for my desired house, which includes a partially integrated side double garage and a large sunny southwest terrace, so the best compromise must be found.
Due to the tall trees on the southwest, we expect western sun only during summer. Also, two neighborâs pine trees cast shade from the south on the likely building site.
When not sleeping, we mainly live on the ground floor, so this has planning priority. The kitchen is an important room, so we prefer a (semi-)open connection to the living room. At least one of us regularly works from home, so a suitable workstation is necessary, but a dedicated home office room is not essential.
Light is important in the living area (kitchen and living room), so we want the top edges of the windows to be as high as possible with roller shutters.
The fireplace is a 95% must-have as a supplementary heat source (and hopefully a cozy feature). Good positioning is a priority, but if possible, weâd like a water-carrying fireplace connected to a buffer tank and/or an additional hot water heating circuit for the bathrooms (e.g., large towel radiators). A ground heat load is planned via an air-to-water heat pump for underfloor heating. Additionally, air conditioning is planned in the master bedroom and childâs room 1.
A central ventilation system is probably too expensive.
The master bedroom should accommodate a double bed and a row of wardrobes.
Childâs room 1 will still serve as a youth room for a few years, later becoming a second bedroom (due to reported nighttime noise of uncertain cause).
The multi-purpose room is not yet definitively assigned: either home office or utility room with space for washing machine and dryer, or storage room.
Preferred room orientations (due to morning sun): kitchen, bathroom, and bedroom facing the garden.
The gable end facing the street seems sensible since photovoltaics are planned on the roof, and the south-facing side (+/- 30°) is expected to have the least shading.
My wifeâs wish for a balcony on the bedroom is âbecause it looks better.â
If built, we would like access to the balcony from the bedroom and the bathroom.
A basement is a 95% must-have due to various hobbies requiring significant space and tools. Also, all technical equipment is planned to be located in the basement.
A garage is essential (as large as possible for 1â2 cars, bicycles, and garden tools), but the house has higher priority. If necessary, the garage can be built later and/or an additional carport added on the street side, or even an underground garage (a small dream).
We now consider a connecting door between house and garage impractical. With the entrance on the gable side, the path is short and convenient anyway.
Gas concrete as preferred wall material was chosen because of its combination of easy handling during shell construction (which tends to avoid the common poor work that can cause thermal bridges), very good sound insulation, pleasant indoor climate, minor advantages during interior finishing, and previous DIY experience with the material. It is also non-combustible, avoids producing large amounts of hazardous waste, and structurally the walls are not potential habitats for insects or small rodents.
House Design
Design origin: by me
-Not designed by a construction company planner yet
-Architect is being sought
-Do-it-yourself approach: yes (reading, trying, thinking, reading, trying, ...)
What do you especially like? Why?
Entrance on street side (front view preferred over side entrance)
Layout of kitchen, bathroom, bedrooms
Kitchen with large work surface, appliance space, and storage
Sauna in the bright bathroom
Bright living room with fireplace
Hallways on ground and first floors and staircase with daylight
Coatroom near entrance (though small)
Small but fully functional guest WC on ground floor
What do you dislike? Why?
Costs likely at the budget limit
Easy access to attic not resolved
Attic usage not finalized
Little distance to right side property boundary
Relatively large hallway areas
Living area (according to CAD program): 135m² (EG 71m², OG 64m²) (1453ft² total; ground floor 764ft², first floor 689ft²)
Estimated price per architect/planner: unknown but would like to know
Personal price limit for the house, including equipment: 550,000 EUR
Personal preferred heating technology: oil/gas (more independent under various situations) and fireplace
Most likely heating system realistically planned: air-to-water heat pump (for various reasons) + fireplace
Possibly additional split air conditioners in master bedroom and childâs room 1
If you have to forgo something, which details or extensions
-can be omitted: balcony, double garage, finished attic
-cannot be omitted: light
Why is the design the way it is now?
The design is one of the results of two years of reading, viewing, own experiences, consideration, and experimentation. There are now many design variants; four or five are basically acceptable to us, each with different pros and cons.
This is one of the options with the smallest living area. I transferred it into a mediocre (very stubborn) CAD system because it provides automatic dimensioning. The system also helps my 3D spatial imagination (e.g., stairs under roof slope, walls stacked, first-floor windows within the building volume, roof in general).
Many details are not finalized yet (e.g., stair to attic, windows, âŚ) because of my lack of knowledge and experience. Also, some window and door types are simply not available in the CAD program; others are stubbornly displayed incorrectly.
The furniture layout shown is currently the best idea, but there are certainly better options (e.g., for the bathrooms).
Thank you in advance for your suggestions and help.
Why on earth do you need an expensive balcony when you have such a large plot of land??
Find the mistake!
- The storage room is missing on the ground floor where you can easily access things.
I have nothing against small houses if they are intelligently designed. But I donât understand planning costs while still insisting on a basement and new furniture.
- The dining table is 180 x 90 cm (71 x 35 inches), which is enough for 4 people.
- Currently, the terrace door is blocked. If you move the table away from it, you canât get past the chimney. With chairs on the tableâs ends, one bumps into the chimney, the other is stuck against the window. You canât get through, so you canât even go to the bathroom while sitting together at the table.
- The kitchen is not ergonomic.
- The half-landing staircase takes up too much space and belongs in office buildings or houses over 160, 170 sqm (1,720, 1,830 sq ft).
- The chimney is not concealed; you practically walk into it. I already commented on the impossible stove connection. Thatâs just not going to work.
- The stove itself must have clearance from the wall.
- The sofa may be 3 meters (10 feet) wide, but it faces away from the nice garden.
- The depth of the guest room is misleading: 3.58 meters (11 feet 9 inches). Furnished with a bed and wardrobe, it only leaves a clearance of about 73 cm (29 inches) between them.
- The hallway is almost 2.80 meters (9 feet 2 inches) wide, which is way too wide; 2 meters (6 feet 7 inches) would be sufficient (for some even 1.40 meters (4 feet 7 inches), but I respect the wish for width after having a narrow space before). But 2.80 meters is definitely too much. The space is missing elsewhere.
- The shower on the ground floor measures 140 x 80 cm (55 x 31 inches), meaning with tiles on plaster walls it has just under 75 cm (30 inches) clearance.
- The window placement there doesnât allow for a mirror above the washbasin. If the wall construction with a 15 cm (6 inch) built-up installation is included, the door wonât open. Or you get a small hand basin, then the guest will have to stand in the shower to brush their teeth overnight.
- Too many windows have been planned to save costs. Their distribution also interferes with good furniture layout.
- A sauna window is not possible because of the lintel.
- A window in the shower is âimpractical.â
- The childrenâs room has only one wall where a wardrobe can be placed. Floor measurements of about 13 sqm (140 sq ft), estimated usable area around 10 sqm (108 sq ft).
I reread the initial post...
So⌠I donât want to criticize aggressively here, but I want to open your eyes about what is actually being planned. To me, this is a beginnerâs draft with so many mistakes that I can only say: start over! A building contractor would build it exactly like this without any adviceâand then youâll wish you had done it differently. By the way, almost 90% of our plots are about 20 meters (66 feet) wide, and I know so many functional, light-filled houses that are not even big.
Sandstapler schrieb:
Floors: basement + ground floor + upper floor
Sandstapler schrieb:
Itâs clearly a matter of money.
Sandstapler schrieb:
We will hardly reuse any furniture.
Sandstapler schrieb:
True. A larger open plan living area would be better, but also more expensive.
Find the mistake!
Sandstapler schrieb:In my view, this is a completely misguided plan! A basement of about 80 sqm (860 sq ft) is planned for a tiny utility room plus laundry room. Maybe also a storage room â oh, and I just read thereâs a hobby room too. Meanwhile, the living/dining area is so cramped you can hardly move around.
This is no longer a preliminary draft.
- The storage room is missing on the ground floor where you can easily access things.
I have nothing against small houses if they are intelligently designed. But I donât understand planning costs while still insisting on a basement and new furniture.
- The dining table is 180 x 90 cm (71 x 35 inches), which is enough for 4 people.
- Currently, the terrace door is blocked. If you move the table away from it, you canât get past the chimney. With chairs on the tableâs ends, one bumps into the chimney, the other is stuck against the window. You canât get through, so you canât even go to the bathroom while sitting together at the table.
- The kitchen is not ergonomic.
- The half-landing staircase takes up too much space and belongs in office buildings or houses over 160, 170 sqm (1,720, 1,830 sq ft).
- The chimney is not concealed; you practically walk into it. I already commented on the impossible stove connection. Thatâs just not going to work.
- The stove itself must have clearance from the wall.
- The sofa may be 3 meters (10 feet) wide, but it faces away from the nice garden.
- The depth of the guest room is misleading: 3.58 meters (11 feet 9 inches). Furnished with a bed and wardrobe, it only leaves a clearance of about 73 cm (29 inches) between them.
- The hallway is almost 2.80 meters (9 feet 2 inches) wide, which is way too wide; 2 meters (6 feet 7 inches) would be sufficient (for some even 1.40 meters (4 feet 7 inches), but I respect the wish for width after having a narrow space before). But 2.80 meters is definitely too much. The space is missing elsewhere.
- The shower on the ground floor measures 140 x 80 cm (55 x 31 inches), meaning with tiles on plaster walls it has just under 75 cm (30 inches) clearance.
- The window placement there doesnât allow for a mirror above the washbasin. If the wall construction with a 15 cm (6 inch) built-up installation is included, the door wonât open. Or you get a small hand basin, then the guest will have to stand in the shower to brush their teeth overnight.
- Too many windows have been planned to save costs. Their distribution also interferes with good furniture layout.
- A sauna window is not possible because of the lintel.
- A window in the shower is âimpractical.â
- The childrenâs room has only one wall where a wardrobe can be placed. Floor measurements of about 13 sqm (140 sq ft), estimated usable area around 10 sqm (108 sq ft).
I reread the initial post...
Sandstapler schrieb:I donât agree at all.
When weâre not sleeping, we primarily live on the ground floor, so it takes priority in the planning for us.
Sandstapler schrieb:I donât see that either. These scattered windows have walls in between. That blocks the light flow.
Light is important to us in the living area (kitchen and living room),
Sandstapler schrieb:And why donât you make use of it?
To the northeast, we have more than 50 meters (165 feet) of green outlook.
Sandstapler schrieb:You have a plot of over 2000 sqm (21,500 sq ft)! A shed for tools offers more potential than an underground floor only accessible via stairs.
A basement is a 95% must, as many storage- and tool-intensive hobbies are hardly feasible otherwise.
Sandstapler schrieb:
-canât do without: light
So⌠I donât want to criticize aggressively here, but I want to open your eyes about what is actually being planned. To me, this is a beginnerâs draft with so many mistakes that I can only say: start over! A building contractor would build it exactly like this without any adviceâand then youâll wish you had done it differently. By the way, almost 90% of our plots are about 20 meters (66 feet) wide, and I know so many functional, light-filled houses that are not even big.
Sandstapler schrieb:
Itâs clearly a matter of money. If the budget allows, sure. But a central ventilation system also requires maintenance.Of course, everything has to be paid for, no question; however, a mechanical ventilation with heat recovery doesnât require much maintenance.For example, you are planning a really expensive basement for hobbies, a non-essential fireplace, an indoor sauna, etc. For me, the interior of the houseâthat is, living comfortâtakes absolute priority (see e.g., air conditioning, mechanical ventilation with heat recovery). In a modern, airtight house, mechanical ventilation would also be essential unless I had a completely open-plan living concept and lived alone or as a couple. I doubt that you will be able to properly ventilate this house with additional residents, and that could lead to problems.
Other features can be added later if the money is available; for instance, a carport instead of a garage, or none of those, if the budget is tight, in order to properly outfit the interior. See here:
Sandstapler schrieb:
The basement is expensive.Sandstapler schrieb:
We will hardly reuse any furniture. The furniture shown in the plan has realistic dimensions. But whether it will actually be placed that way is still being discussed.Exactlyâhow you want to sit and live should be clarified beforehand, because that affects many things like windows, electrical outlets, sockets, the sense of space, and much more. Only after that can you design a room well for yourselves.Sandstapler schrieb:
The dining area is tight, thatâs true. So far, I havenât come up with a better option. The door by the dining table is a sliding door, which the software displays incorrectly. As I said, itâs currently frustrating that we canât work in the kitchen with two or three people at the same time. Hence the larger kitchen.Four or even eight dining spaces definitely wonât fit; one chair is almost touching the sofa. I would also recommend using a simple drawing on graph paper for planning instead of struggling with the limitations of software; this old-school method has many advantages. I understand the bigger kitchen, but then dining and living areas become smaller or neglected, making them less pleasant to use. In the living room, you canât even sit opposite each other and have a conversation...
Sandstapler schrieb:
True. A larger open-plan room would be better but also more expensive. The hallway on the ground floor is wide because our current hallway is too narrow. Did I overcompensate here? Since there is enough space in the hallway but not in the open area, I found the door placement logical.Of course, more space means higher cost, but a poorly designed house becomes very expensive and unenjoyable. Certainly, you may overdo it in areas that bothered you before; in summer, as a non-expert, you often plan a house differently than when itâs bitterly cold outside. The hallway is not inherently too large, but compared to the boundaries of dining and living areas, it then seems âtooâ big for a purely utility corridor; the unusual door swing direction is just a consequence of this.Sandstapler schrieb:
In the last three years, more than one person only sat on the sofa when we had guests. And then the TV was either off or a console was connected.That will change, especially as the needs of older residents evolve, so itâs important to look closely at that.Sandstapler schrieb:
how our daily routine in the house will look like.Exactly, and this will be different in the future.You are apparently two âolder adultsâ and one 17-year-old. I donât like the floor plan at all due to its dimensions and awkward proportions. Besides, itâs unusual that soon there will be three adults living together. Will all three permanently sleep upstairs, or would it be worth considering that the 17-year-old live on the ground floor with an en-suite bathroom?
I would want more privacy inside the house, which I donât see currently.
Your comment about the budget is absolutely correct, but I see lots of planned âluxuriesâ that arenât essential for living. Before cutting out must-haves, you should first remove or at least postpone the nice-to-haves.
An indoor sauna is nice but can be done for a fraction of the cost outdoorsâyou have space on your property anyway.
A fireplace is also nice, but if you donât use it for heating, itâs simply an unnecessary expense, especially with underfloor heating installed. I have lived in my house for 30 years without either a carport or garageâitâs possible if the money isnât there.
My suggestion: find a really smart floor plan (many can be found online) that will provide good living quality for your â17-55â situation in the future. Equip the house technically well (high-quality insulation, mechanical ventilation with heat recovery, air conditioning if desired), and only then see if you have money left for an indoor sauna, fireplace, carport, etc.
Or: cut the really expensive basement and build a spacious garden house on one level (you have the space, and wonât have to climb stairs as you get older).
To me, your priorities seem off because I get the impression you definitely want to include all the âluxuriesâ but want to leave out important must-haves like privacy and living space. The focus should be on a comfortable HOME.
My advice: back to square one...
S
Sandstapler17 May 2025 19:3211ant schrieb:
A preliminary design is an important planning step and cannot be replaced by even a very large number of multiple or excessive drafts.No one argued against that. I donât know how it was or is for others, but it helped me a lot to identify and separate dreams, wishes, and necessities.11ant schrieb:
Paint is not suitable for preliminary designs; a good preliminary design is not clicked but scribbled.I would have assumed that a good preliminary design convinces through a good layout, regardless of the medium it was created on. Changing a draft made in Paint by clicking is faster than on a scribbled one, and you can always revert to an earlier version, if saved. What exactly was the advantage of scribbling again?11ant schrieb:
Do you mean an "architect" aka drafter? â an interior wall not yet dimensioned should better be assumed at 2 decimeters (8 inches) rather than specifically 24 centimeters (9.5 inches) thick. The ignorance of octameter measurements is problematic not because of work inefficiency during cutting breaks, but because it has a domino effect on sloppy joints instead of clean butt joints and, due to disruptions in the rhythm, further affects the overlap dimensions.I wouldnât have expected that a 4cm (1.6 inches) difference in wall thickness is so important in a draft. With 60 x 42cm (24 x 17 inches) blocks, clean joints are easy to achieve. I managed that myself even with 50 x 36cm (20 x 14 inches) blocks.11ant schrieb:
Aerated concrete of caliber 425 should only be used starting from EH40; and a Euromodule stretcher length belongs in industrial construction.Got it.11ant schrieb:
A comfort fireplace runs on a Raspberry without a chimney. As for turning it into a water-bearing useful device, I, as a businessman (just over 56), will say nothing.Anyone who finds a screen cozy should use it. I find fireplaces beautiful, so fireplace it is. On my property, there are dozens of cubic meters of wood that will have to be cut for construction. That wood can feed a fireplace for years. Or I let the wood rot because some people donât like fireplaces. With water-bearing operation, the heat output of a fireplace is spread out or even stored. Cheap polemics donât change that.11ant schrieb:
The cost intensity of a basement doesnât need to be guessed but can be frighteningly accurately calculated with the help of the 11ant basement rule. However, this should be clarified before you start drawing anything.The guess referred to the budget problem, not that a basement is expensive. Was that unclear? Why a basement is explained in the opening post.You are speaking my mind, @Arauki11
Living comfort for me means space. Space so that all individuals living in the house can develop individually and donât constantly have to ask âcan I get through?â Here, no one can even watch TV undisturbed while others are drinking coffee.
Exactly: living here is simply no fun.
Not if it is distributed appropriately where it is needed. The focus of the original poster is kitchen, hallway, and basement (which is actually unknown here).
Exactly. And you said it yourself: there should be enough space on the property for hobbies, but they are squeezed into the houseâand on the wrong floors.
But you donât have that. You donât have a good room layout!
It isnât for an amateur draft either. But donât expect a cheap planner to fix your flawed design.
Then design a fireplace that is actually used and functional!
Arauki11 schrieb:
For me, the interior of the house, meaning the living comfort, has absolute priority (see, for example, air conditioning, controlled ventilation systems...)
Living comfort for me means space. Space so that all individuals living in the house can develop individually and donât constantly have to ask âcan I get through?â Here, no one can even watch TV undisturbed while others are drinking coffee.
Arauki11 schrieb:
but an unsuitable house is very expensive and no fun at all.
Exactly: living here is simply no fun.
Arauki11 schrieb:
Of course, more space is more expensive
Not if it is distributed appropriately where it is needed. The focus of the original poster is kitchen, hallway, and basement (which is actually unknown here).
Arauki11 schrieb:
I would need more privacy inside the house and I currently donât see that.
Exactly. And you said it yourself: there should be enough space on the property for hobbies, but they are squeezed into the houseâand on the wrong floors.
Sandstapler schrieb:
And I would have expected a good preliminary design to convince through good room layout,
But you donât have that. You donât have a good room layout!
Sandstapler schrieb:
I wouldnât have expected that a 4cm (1.6 inch) difference in wall thickness would be that important in a design.
It isnât for an amateur draft either. But donât expect a cheap planner to fix your flawed design.
Sandstapler schrieb:
I like fireplaces, so thatâs why I want a fireplace.
Then design a fireplace that is actually used and functional!
Sandstapler schrieb:
If someone finds a display cozy, they should use it. I like fireplaces, so I have a fireplace. Of course, you can decide that way, but have you ever had a fireplace in a completely airtight, well-insulated house with underfloor heating at the same time? Simply saying "I want" a fireplace or similar features often doesnât make much sense unless you also consider the interaction and clarify whether it fits together. In addition, such a small room will especially overheat very quickly.
Sandstapler schrieb:
There are dozens of cubic meters of wood on my property that will have to be cut down for construction. I could feed a fireplace for years with that. Or I can just let the wood rot because some people donât like fireplaces. ...and why would you install another expensive heating system instead of using this free option with wood and a fireplace, which you also like? A masonry heater or a good wood stove plus a supplemental heating system (air conditioning and/or infrared) could be an option, and suddenly youâd have several thousand dollars left for other extras or for the previously omitted controlled mechanical ventilation system / heat recovery ventilation.
Sandstapler schrieb:
Because some people donât like fireplaces. Um... I actually like fireplaces very much and use mine effectively for heating.
Arauki11 schrieb:
...so why would you install another expensive heating system instead of using the free and, as you love, wood and stove option? A masonry heater or a good wood stove plus an auxiliary heater (air conditioning and/or infrared) could be a solution, and just like that, youâd have several thousand left over for other extras or the previously removed mechanical ventilation system.I wonât say much about the floor plans, as others here have more expertise. However, regarding the wood stove in a fully insulated house with a heat pump, I can share my âŹ0.05 from personal experience:
For us, the wood stove was a given. We love the cozy warmth of a wood fire!
What we underestimated: a heat pump with underfloor heating only runs efficiently if it operates continuously â meaning the indoor temperature remains consistently comfortable. When we light the stove, the living room temperature quickly exceeds 27°C (81°F). Thatâs nice sometimes, but obviously not a comfortable permanent condition... As a result, we hardly use the wood stove in winter.
Itâs great, though, during the transitional seasons. I switch off the heat pump after Carnival and heat with the stove when needed (southern Bavaria â it can be chilly then). Over the entire heating period, burning 0.5 cords roughly estimates our consumption.
If I read correctly that you want to make the wood stove water-heated with a buffer tank IN ADDITION to the heat pump, I can only advise against it (see also @Arauki11âs post). That would be pointless overkill because you wonât be able to fully utilize the wood without keeping sauna-like temperatures in the house constantly. (Although, of course, you could save money on a sauna then... semicolon, colon, bracket).
Moreover, these combined systems apparently donât always run smoothly with heat pumps and similar setups.
As I said â just a well-meant tip from my own experience. I never regret choosing the wood stove but would reconsider the water-heated option or, as Arauki suggested, rethink the heating concept to prioritize wood as the main energy source.
Similar topics