ᐅ 1-2 single-family houses on a hillside with a partial basement, optional rental possibility
Created on: 12 Mar 2018 14:37
B
Bremediana
Dear experienced builders,
I am about to submit a building permit application / planning permission – and before it’s too late, I would like to get your opinions and any suggestions for improvement.
Below are the usual questions answered. Still, some special notes in text form:
• The house is located on a dyke. The garden lies lower, facing southwest.
• On the street side, northeast, the kitchen, bathroom, and entrance should be located. From here there is a view of the land in front of the dyke and the river.
• Dense urban development, the neighbors all have two floors with pitched roofs.
Development plan / restrictions:
Two floors, a mostly closed building line intended, but exceptions are possible and have basically been approved. Building along the left property boundary. No windows allowed here.
Plot size:
800 sqm (8611 sq ft), long and narrow. The garden is about one floor height lower than the house footprint.
Slope:
Yes, or rather dyke. Towards the garden it drops about one floor height.
Building window, building line, and boundary:
I am allowed to build slightly set back, as the current (still existing) house sits. This is already approved.
Requirements from the building inspector:
I have to demolish the existing house and pay for pile foundation – so the rest must be as economical as possible.
Style, roof shape, building type:
I would prefer the gable facing the street because this allows for more windows.
The nice river view will only be possible from the first floor, as the dyke will be raised further in the coming years. However, in summer the tree canopies obstruct the view from above.
Basement, floors:
If the budget allows, a partial basement in the garden, which is at a lower level.
Number of occupants, age:
One or two, over 50 years old.
Optional rental should be possible.
[B]
[B]Space requirements on ground and upper floors:[/B]
Ground floor: kitchen, bathroom, and enough space to live on one level if necessary.
[B]Architecture:[/B]
As bright as possible.
[B]Balcony, roof terrace:[/B]
Possibly a roof terrace on the partial basement, if there will be one.
[B]House design:[/B]
Comes from my architect, who tries to plan economically in my interests.
[B]Positive aspects:
• Walls stacked vertically (apparently saves money)
• Kitchen with views of the street and river
• Living room on the upper floor with both southwest garden view and northeast view to the river and trees.
I look forward to your feedback!
Many thanks for your effort.
I am about to submit a building permit application / planning permission – and before it’s too late, I would like to get your opinions and any suggestions for improvement.
Below are the usual questions answered. Still, some special notes in text form:
• The house is located on a dyke. The garden lies lower, facing southwest.
• On the street side, northeast, the kitchen, bathroom, and entrance should be located. From here there is a view of the land in front of the dyke and the river.
• Dense urban development, the neighbors all have two floors with pitched roofs.
- A lot of effort for the preparation (pile foundation), so only a small budget. I would be grateful for ideas on where I could still save costs, as well as advice on potential tricky spots.
- The house is intended for one, possibly two people. Upstairs should allow for optional rental!
Development plan / restrictions:
Two floors, a mostly closed building line intended, but exceptions are possible and have basically been approved. Building along the left property boundary. No windows allowed here.
Plot size:
800 sqm (8611 sq ft), long and narrow. The garden is about one floor height lower than the house footprint.
Slope:
Yes, or rather dyke. Towards the garden it drops about one floor height.
Building window, building line, and boundary:
I am allowed to build slightly set back, as the current (still existing) house sits. This is already approved.
Requirements from the building inspector:
I have to demolish the existing house and pay for pile foundation – so the rest must be as economical as possible.
Style, roof shape, building type:
I would prefer the gable facing the street because this allows for more windows.
The nice river view will only be possible from the first floor, as the dyke will be raised further in the coming years. However, in summer the tree canopies obstruct the view from above.
Basement, floors:
If the budget allows, a partial basement in the garden, which is at a lower level.
Number of occupants, age:
One or two, over 50 years old.
Optional rental should be possible.
[B]
[B]Space requirements on ground and upper floors:[/B]
Ground floor: kitchen, bathroom, and enough space to live on one level if necessary.
[B]Architecture:[/B]
As bright as possible.
[B]Balcony, roof terrace:[/B]
Possibly a roof terrace on the partial basement, if there will be one.
[B]House design:[/B]
Comes from my architect, who tries to plan economically in my interests.
[B]Positive aspects:
• Walls stacked vertically (apparently saves money)
• Kitchen with views of the street and river
• Living room on the upper floor with both southwest garden view and northeast view to the river and trees.
I look forward to your feedback!
Many thanks for your effort.
Bremediana13 Mar 2018 23:48kaho674 schrieb:
I think a shared staircase is nonsense and wouldn’t spend a cent on it.It’s a matter of taste and budget. I didn’t want to waste space for a staircase at the front or back (visibility). There isn’t enough room on the side. A shared access doesn’t bother me.
Bremediana schrieb:
A shared entrance doesn't bother me.After all, you don't build a house to live like in a shared flat, do you? Or have I misunderstood something?
Bremediana14 Mar 2018 09:29kaho674 schrieb:
You don’t build a house to then live in it like a shared flat. Or am I missing something?I would like to focus on discussing the architecture here, not lifestyles.
Bremediana14 Mar 2018 09:31kaho674 schrieb:
You don’t build a house just to live like in a shared flat. Or have I misunderstood something?I would like to discuss the architecture here, not lifestyles.
Bremediana schrieb:
I would like to discuss the architecture here, not lifestyle concepts These things always go together – after all, it’s meant to be lived in.
As you might notice, there has been little feedback so far. One reason is probably the confusion caused by the different floor plans.
But I’ll give it a try anyway:
Ground floor:
Mechanical room far too small.
Cloakroom only under the stairs or where exactly?
Where do you put a TV if one is desired?
If separated, there is only a shower – no bathtub anymore – okay if that doesn’t matter.
Upper floor:
Bathroom without a window looks like it was just randomly placed wherever there was space.
Behind that, a narrow useless "hallway" or whatever. What to do with the space behind the stairs? Apparently, the architect didn’t know either and just desperately put two armchairs there.
Two-family concept:
On the ground floor:
Mechanical room too small.
Cloakroom completely missing now.
On the upper floor:
Bathroom again without a window.
No cloakroom.
Kitchen is an unattractive narrow corridor with some kind of partition wall? Really?
Space for furniture is almost zero. The poor tenant has to do laundry in the bathroom already. But where are bucket, vacuum cleaner, etc. supposed to go?
Where is the TV supposed to be? Or is that blue element across the window meant as a room divider for the TV?
Overall, great looking from the outside, but poor inside, I would say.
Similar topics