ᐅ First Draft Single-Family Home 160m² – Request for Feedback

Created on: 26 Feb 2017 12:55

Hello everyone,

I have been a silent reader of this forum for months. Now, we are at the stage of choosing a home builder. An architect is not an option for various reasons. Our preferred builder has provided us with the following initial draft.

Development plan/restrictions: there is no development plan
Plot size: 500 sqm (5380 sq ft)
Slope
Site coverage ratio
Floor area ratio
Building envelope, building line, and boundary
Perimeter development
Number of parking spaces: 2 (preferably tandem)
Number of floors: 1.5
Roof type: gable roof
Architectural style
Orientation
Maximum heights/limits
Other requirements

Client requirements
Architectural style, roof type, building type
Basement, floors: no basement
Number of occupants, age: 2 (31 and 32 years), 2 children planned
Space requirements on ground floor and upper floor: living room, guest/study room, 2 children’s rooms, bedroom
Office: family use or home office? Both
Number of overnight guests per year: 10
Open or closed architecture: open
Traditional or modern construction: preferably modern
Open kitchen, kitchen island: yes
Number of dining seats: 8
Fireplace: no
Music/sound wall: yes
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: carport with storage room
Utility garden, greenhouse
Further wishes/special features/daily routine, including reasons why certain aspects should or should not be included

House design
Who created the plan:
- Planner from a building company
What do you particularly like? Why?
What do you dislike? Why?
Estimated price according to architect/planner: €260,000
Personal budget for the house, including fittings: €280,000
Preferred heating system: gas condensing boiler

If you have to omit certain details or expansions:
- What can you do without:
- What is essential for you: daylight

Site plan of a residential area with numbered plots, street layout and buildings

Ground floor plan: living/dining/kitchen, guest/study, entrance hall, WC, utility room, stairs.

House floor plan: ground floor with sleeping, dressing room, bathroom, hallway, child 1, child 2; approx. 78 sqm (840 sq ft).

RobsonMKK29 Mar 2017 13:29

#31

Markus1304 schrieb:
Alternatively, we could raise the knee wall to 1.37m (4 ft 6 in) and keep the roof pitch at 38 degrees.

If the additional cost isn’t too high, definitely yes.
I wouldn’t necessarily go up to 45 degrees. Personally, I find a flatter roof more appealing, so if possible, maybe even lower the roof a bit. However, that might conflict with the knee wall height.

Markus130429 Mar 2017 13:43

#32

The additional cost for the 45-degree roof pitch would be €5,300. Raising the knee wall from 1.13 m (3 ft 8 in) to 1.38 m (4 ft 6 in) would be just under €1,800. Increasing it further to 1.50 m (4 ft 11 in) would add nearly another €900. I think it’s worth it for me.

RobsonMKK29 Mar 2017 13:46

#33

What helped me (when we were still planning with a pitched roof) was to draw it out on graph paper in millimeters. This way, you can clearly see how the changes affect the design and how the 2-meter (6.6 feet) line shifts relative to the house wall.

Nofret29 Mar 2017 14:26

#34

It would be worth it to me as well – the usable space clearly increases.

11ant29 Mar 2017 14:35

#35

Markus1304 schrieb:
Do you think a roof pitch of 38 degrees with a knee wall height of 1.13 m (3 ft 8 in) is sufficient? [...] However, the additional cost for a 45-degree roof pitch is too high for us. Alternatively, we could raise the knee wall to 1.37 m (4 ft 6 in)

The price I would consider too high is the design-related one: the planned pitch visually cannot accommodate an unlimited knee wall height. My impression is that the elevation drawings already assume more than 1.13 m (3 ft 8 in). I wouldn’t choose more than 1.37 m (4 ft 6 in) (in fact, this is noted in the plans on average).

Markus1304 schrieb:
Are there any further comments on the current window configuration (the door shown on the north-facing exterior is obviously incorrectly located)?

Not only is the door on the north elevation incorrectly placed (mirror-flipped in the wrong spot, located in the study instead of the utility room), but also the two patio doors on the north elevation in the living/study rooms have the wrong opening direction.

I would change:
1. The sliding door: shift it half its width toward the sofa (otherwise it just faces a wall), and reverse the sliding direction (so the exit to the terrace doesn’t move);
2. The back door to the utility room: I would not make it glazed and, for visual symmetry, would not use the same color as the other window elements but rather color it on the outside to match the facade;
3. For the other windows on this facade, I would suggest making the bathroom window and the lower parts of the windows in the bathroom and bedroom frosted glass, and satin the upper parts up to about handle height.

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

Markus130429 Mar 2017 14:46

#36

11ant schrieb:

Here’s what I would change:
1. The sliding door: move it half its width toward the sofa (otherwise it just faces the wall), and change the sliding direction accordingly (so the exit to the terrace doesn’t shift);
2. The side entrance door to the utility room: I wouldn’t make it glazed, and for visual symmetry I wouldn’t use the same color as the other window frames, but instead wrap it in the same color as the facade on the outside;
3. For the other windows on this facade, I would suggest making the toilet window and the lower parts of the bathroom and bedroom windows frosted glass, and satin finish the upper parts up to about handle height.

Thank you for your comments.

Regarding 1) In my opinion, that would take up too much wall space for the TV, stereo system, etc.

Regarding 2) That is drawn incorrectly. It should not be glazed, but possibly with a transom window to allow natural light into the utility room.

Regarding 3) Very good ideas!

ᐅ First Draft Single-Family Home 160m² – Request for Feedback

Reaktionen