ᐅ A three-family house planned without a basement—your feedback on my floor plan.
Created on: 14 Sep 2018 11:50
T
tumaa
Hello everyone,
First of all, thank you for letting me join the forum 🙂.
We (parents and 3 children, aged 10, 8, and 3) have bought a plot of land.
Size: 1170 m² (12,573 sq ft)
Special feature: commercial area
Building project: a three-family house with approximately 300 m² (3,229 sq ft), about 150 m² (1,615 sq ft) for us on the ground floor, and around 73 m² (786 sq ft) for each unit on the upper floor.
There is a single-family house on the plot, which is planned to be demolished.
The preliminary building approval was already positive.
At first, it was planned (I hadn’t really thought about it) that the new building would be constructed on the footprint of the old one.
Then I consulted an architect.
He recommended moving the new building further back on the plot (further north).
Reason:
+ The rear part of the plot is wider, which is better for the building
+ Making better use of the south-facing side for the living and dining area would be more efficient 🙂, plus my wife has a cooking channel with frequent video recordings, so she needs a lot of natural light. (This is very important for us)
We then inquired at the building authority, but the idea was rejected.
Reason: since it is a commercial area, the new building must be constructed on the footprint of the old one. Otherwise, the building office must consider that neighbors might take legal action.
Right next door is a joinery workshop, but production takes place on the other side, so only the warehouse is adjacent. The joiner initially wanted to buy the plot as well; we then received the agreement.
The plot is basically on a corner, separated from the next neighbors by a small path.
My idea was perhaps to get a written confirmation from the neighbors, including the joiner 🙂, stating that they agree with moving the new building further back (see attachment "Site Plan 2"). There is basically no objection; no one would be disturbed (e.g., no loss of view, etc.), and it will be built anyway 🙂.
Otherwise, I would have to stick to the first site plan.
There is also a preliminary floor plan (see attachment).
Another idea: the attic (roof shapes are not specified) could later be used as living space, for example for our son; however, it may only be considered “extended living space” according to the building authority. We are building without a basement, so the attic could initially be used as additional storage.
Question:
- What do you think of our design? At first glance, we like it, but what would you do differently and why?
or
- How else could the house be well positioned?
- Since two rental apartments are planned, what else should be considered, for example regarding privacy?
I’m new to this topic, so please be understanding if I forgot something 🙂.
Thank you in advance and I’m looking forward to your feedback 🙂!!!
First of all, thank you for letting me join the forum 🙂.
We (parents and 3 children, aged 10, 8, and 3) have bought a plot of land.
Size: 1170 m² (12,573 sq ft)
Special feature: commercial area
Building project: a three-family house with approximately 300 m² (3,229 sq ft), about 150 m² (1,615 sq ft) for us on the ground floor, and around 73 m² (786 sq ft) for each unit on the upper floor.
There is a single-family house on the plot, which is planned to be demolished.
The preliminary building approval was already positive.
At first, it was planned (I hadn’t really thought about it) that the new building would be constructed on the footprint of the old one.
Then I consulted an architect.
He recommended moving the new building further back on the plot (further north).
Reason:
+ The rear part of the plot is wider, which is better for the building
+ Making better use of the south-facing side for the living and dining area would be more efficient 🙂, plus my wife has a cooking channel with frequent video recordings, so she needs a lot of natural light. (This is very important for us)
We then inquired at the building authority, but the idea was rejected.
Reason: since it is a commercial area, the new building must be constructed on the footprint of the old one. Otherwise, the building office must consider that neighbors might take legal action.
Right next door is a joinery workshop, but production takes place on the other side, so only the warehouse is adjacent. The joiner initially wanted to buy the plot as well; we then received the agreement.
The plot is basically on a corner, separated from the next neighbors by a small path.
My idea was perhaps to get a written confirmation from the neighbors, including the joiner 🙂, stating that they agree with moving the new building further back (see attachment "Site Plan 2"). There is basically no objection; no one would be disturbed (e.g., no loss of view, etc.), and it will be built anyway 🙂.
Otherwise, I would have to stick to the first site plan.
There is also a preliminary floor plan (see attachment).
Another idea: the attic (roof shapes are not specified) could later be used as living space, for example for our son; however, it may only be considered “extended living space” according to the building authority. We are building without a basement, so the attic could initially be used as additional storage.
Question:
- What do you think of our design? At first glance, we like it, but what would you do differently and why?
or
- How else could the house be well positioned?
- Since two rental apartments are planned, what else should be considered, for example regarding privacy?
I’m new to this topic, so please be understanding if I forgot something 🙂.
Thank you in advance and I’m looking forward to your feedback 🙂!!!
haydee schrieb:
You are the sole earner and will initially increase your debt by 250,000 to 300,000, along with the monthly financial burden and the risk.
What will you do if a tenant doesn’t pay rent? That risk is always there.
You’ll need to build up reserves almost from the start. Tenants don’t always treat someone else’s property carefully.
On Sundays, you’ll get calls about clogged toilets. You are the property manager.
You’ll lose the benefits of owning your own home.
No peaceful time in your garden
Noise from your tenants
Tenants complaining because your children are noisy
Later, when others think about age-appropriate living, you’ll want to move up.
Where will the trash bins for three households go? Parking spaces are also needed.
Is there no storage room and laundry room for the tenants?
Almost every rental unit has a storage room outside the apartment.My financial advisor told me:
For a single-family house: you get about €360,000 including the plot of land
For a three-family house: about €540,000 including the plot of land
The plot cost about €110,000
I would have to pay around €1,600 per month for both options for interest and repayment, assuming a 15-year fixed interest period.
tumaa schrieb:
would have to pay about €1600 (approximately $1700) per month for interest and principal for both options with a 15-year fixed interest rate. Because someone might have already deducted the potential incoming rent from that. Did that person also take into account the income taxes you have to pay on rental income? That’s not a serious comparison.
Either he has already taken the rental income into account, or you have a significantly higher outstanding loan balance with the 540,000.
360,000 for 150 sqm (1,615 sq ft) including land is not enough.
540,000 for 300 sqm (3,230 sq ft) including land is not enough.
With 540,000, your financial advisor will receive a higher commission.
That is certain.
360,000 for 150 sqm (1,615 sq ft) including land is not enough.
540,000 for 300 sqm (3,230 sq ft) including land is not enough.
With 540,000, your financial advisor will receive a higher commission.
That is certain.
The idea of building two fully functional multi-person granny flats is fundamentally appealing to me. However, it seems that the real issue here is not about the qualitative importance but rather the imbalance between the main focus and the less important details.
I see a building with the character of a rental apartment block. In my opinion, this is largely because the concept is not actually a three-family house, but rather a four-family house with a combined double apartment on the ground floor. As an owner-occupier, I would not find that attractive enough.
The designer seems to be a typical occasional multi-family house architect: they often design semi-detached units in the form of identical twins, a style that professional multi-family developers have moved away from since the 1980s. Basically, it feels to me like an off-the-shelf design from that era, repurposed with external thermal insulation (ETICS). To put it bluntly, it fits OWL (in the sense of the Bielefeld conspiracy).
My approach, instead of centering on the main owner-occupier apartment, would be the opposite: to plan the other units around mine (and not mine around the others).
This way, I would avoid problems associated with being a landlord who is too involved, keep my ownership hidden from tenants, and appoint my brother-in-law in Buxtehude as the property manager ;-)
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
I see a building with the character of a rental apartment block. In my opinion, this is largely because the concept is not actually a three-family house, but rather a four-family house with a combined double apartment on the ground floor. As an owner-occupier, I would not find that attractive enough.
The designer seems to be a typical occasional multi-family house architect: they often design semi-detached units in the form of identical twins, a style that professional multi-family developers have moved away from since the 1980s. Basically, it feels to me like an off-the-shelf design from that era, repurposed with external thermal insulation (ETICS). To put it bluntly, it fits OWL (in the sense of the Bielefeld conspiracy).
My approach, instead of centering on the main owner-occupier apartment, would be the opposite: to plan the other units around mine (and not mine around the others).
This way, I would avoid problems associated with being a landlord who is too involved, keep my ownership hidden from tenants, and appoint my brother-in-law in Buxtehude as the property manager ;-)
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
11ant schrieb:
I generally like the idea of building two fully functional multi-person accessory apartments. However, it seems to me that, in terms of qualitative importance, this is not the main issue.
I see a building with the character of a rental apartment block. In my opinion, this is largely because, conceptually, it is not actually a three-family house but a four-family house with a combined double apartment on the ground floor. As a homeowner living there myself, I would not find that appealing enough.
The designer seems to me to be a typical occasional multi-family house architect: they often design two-unit buildings like identical twins, a concept that professional multi-family developers had already moved away from in the 1980s. Essentially, it feels to me like a standard off-the-shelf design from that era, retrofitted with ETICS (external thermal insulation composite system). To put it bluntly, it fits the OWL region quite well (in the spirit of the Bielefeld conspiracy).
My approach, instead of planning my own primary residence underneath the others, would be the opposite: to design the other apartments around my own apartment.
That way, I would avoid problems of being an overly involved landlord, not revealing my ownership to the tenants at all, and putting my brother-in-law in Buxtehude forward as the property manager ;-)well, that’s what we told him ... basically how the layout on the ground floor could look like.