Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: over 1000 sqm (about 0.25 acres)
Slope: gentle
Site coverage ratio: 0.30
Floor area ratio: 0.50
Building envelope, building line and boundary: FULLY utilized due to relatively small size, as this will be the second house on the plot (building in the second row)
Edge development: no
Number of parking spaces: 3 parking spaces + 2 garages in front of the old house
Number of stories: 1 + converted attic
Roof shape: open choice
Style: standard
Orientation: terrace facing south/west, garden also south/west; entrance on the north side
Maximum height / limits
Other requirements
Homeowners’ Requirements
Style, roof shape, building type
Basement, floors: fully basemented, planning 1-2 additional living rooms there (e.g., guest rooms)
Number of people, ages: 2 adults (40/36 years old) and 2 children (1 and 3 years old)
Space needs on ground floor: living/dining area, and one room (office). Upper floor: 3 bedrooms
Office: yes, for home office, IMPORTANT
Guests per year, frequently and for long stays (hence basement! with 2 additional rooms and underfloor heating)
Open or closed architecture: open
Conservative or modern style: modern
Open kitchen, kitchen island: open kitchen
Number of dining seats: 6-8
Fireplace: YES
Music / stereo wall: not important
Balcony, roof terrace: no, but there will be a terrace
Garage, carport: at the old house!
Vegetable garden, greenhouse: not important
Other wishes / special features / daily routine, including reasons why some options are included or excluded
House Design
Planning by:
- Architect
What do you like most? Why?
Size of children’s rooms (14 sqm (150 sq ft)), open layout, open kitchen, very large office (due to extensive home office work!)
What do you dislike? Why?
Entry area (entrance leads into the living room on the north wall, meaning carrying groceries to the kitchen/pantry still involves a long walk)
Cost estimate from architect/planner:
Pure house cost excluding ancillary building costs €400,000 for 173 sqm (1861 sq ft) living space + 93 sqm (1001 sq ft) basement (fully fitted with underfloor heating!)
Personal price limit for house, including fittings: acceptable
Preferred heating technology: air source heat pump with ventilation system
What can you do without?
- What you can give up: little
- What you cannot give up: many things, e.g., fireplace, office, large living/dining area
Why does the design look the way it does now?
For example:
Currently on the 4th version from the architect, and still not 100% satisfied.
Which wishes have been implemented by the architect? Yes, waiting for the entrance on the north side to be moved a few meters further west, meaning the staircase should be relocated more to the east (downstairs) along the wall directly.
What is the key/fundamental question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
Looking for ideas on how to further optimize it, possibly relocating the staircase elsewhere.
Currently, the kitchen / living-dining area should remain as is because they face south (living/dining) and west (kitchen) with garden views.
The upper floor can be completely redesigned. It is important that the children’s rooms remain at least 14 sqm (150 sq ft). The parents' bedroom can be smaller.
Plot size: over 1000 sqm (about 0.25 acres)
Slope: gentle
Site coverage ratio: 0.30
Floor area ratio: 0.50
Building envelope, building line and boundary: FULLY utilized due to relatively small size, as this will be the second house on the plot (building in the second row)
Edge development: no
Number of parking spaces: 3 parking spaces + 2 garages in front of the old house
Number of stories: 1 + converted attic
Roof shape: open choice
Style: standard
Orientation: terrace facing south/west, garden also south/west; entrance on the north side
Maximum height / limits
Other requirements
Homeowners’ Requirements
Style, roof shape, building type
Basement, floors: fully basemented, planning 1-2 additional living rooms there (e.g., guest rooms)
Number of people, ages: 2 adults (40/36 years old) and 2 children (1 and 3 years old)
Space needs on ground floor: living/dining area, and one room (office). Upper floor: 3 bedrooms
Office: yes, for home office, IMPORTANT
Guests per year, frequently and for long stays (hence basement! with 2 additional rooms and underfloor heating)
Open or closed architecture: open
Conservative or modern style: modern
Open kitchen, kitchen island: open kitchen
Number of dining seats: 6-8
Fireplace: YES
Music / stereo wall: not important
Balcony, roof terrace: no, but there will be a terrace
Garage, carport: at the old house!
Vegetable garden, greenhouse: not important
Other wishes / special features / daily routine, including reasons why some options are included or excluded
House Design
Planning by:
- Architect
What do you like most? Why?
Size of children’s rooms (14 sqm (150 sq ft)), open layout, open kitchen, very large office (due to extensive home office work!)
What do you dislike? Why?
Entry area (entrance leads into the living room on the north wall, meaning carrying groceries to the kitchen/pantry still involves a long walk)
Cost estimate from architect/planner:
Pure house cost excluding ancillary building costs €400,000 for 173 sqm (1861 sq ft) living space + 93 sqm (1001 sq ft) basement (fully fitted with underfloor heating!)
Personal price limit for house, including fittings: acceptable
Preferred heating technology: air source heat pump with ventilation system
What can you do without?
- What you can give up: little
- What you cannot give up: many things, e.g., fireplace, office, large living/dining area
Why does the design look the way it does now?
For example:
Currently on the 4th version from the architect, and still not 100% satisfied.
Which wishes have been implemented by the architect? Yes, waiting for the entrance on the north side to be moved a few meters further west, meaning the staircase should be relocated more to the east (downstairs) along the wall directly.
What is the key/fundamental question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
Looking for ideas on how to further optimize it, possibly relocating the staircase elsewhere.
Currently, the kitchen / living-dining area should remain as is because they face south (living/dining) and west (kitchen) with garden views.
The upper floor can be completely redesigned. It is important that the children’s rooms remain at least 14 sqm (150 sq ft). The parents' bedroom can be smaller.
@Hyponex ... it would be useful to show the entire house including the existing building, the property boundaries, and the building envelope on the plot. Ideally with a north arrow and some measurements included.
Because, presumably, the entrance relocation suggested by Tamstar won’t be possible – right?
Regarding
I immediately thought about swapping the living room and kitchen.
Because, presumably, the entrance relocation suggested by Tamstar won’t be possible – right?
Regarding
I immediately thought about swapping the living room and kitchen.
@kbt09
So the entrance area of the Tamstar would work, since the north side is completely open and we can place the entrance wherever we want. However, the higher up it is, the longer the path to the street.
I’ll see if I can make a map with both options tomorrow, I don’t have anything on hand right now.
Living / Kitchen: yes, the architect originally designed it as you described, but we swapped it because we want to be able to look from the kitchen into the garden, so we can keep an eye on the kids while cooking.
So the entrance area of the Tamstar would work, since the north side is completely open and we can place the entrance wherever we want. However, the higher up it is, the longer the path to the street.
I’ll see if I can make a map with both options tomorrow, I don’t have anything on hand right now.
Living / Kitchen: yes, the architect originally designed it as you described, but we swapped it because we want to be able to look from the kitchen into the garden, so we can keep an eye on the kids while cooking.
Hyponex schrieb:
So heating, technical equipment, and laundry room in the basement, Then you have just used up 10sqm (approximately 108 sq ft). There is still plenty of space to use it differently.
If you plan living spaces in the basement, you should also include window wells for daylight windows (second means of escape).
The extension is not very eco-friendly and could cause increased costs when complying with the energy saving regulations.
Since this extension also uses part of the plot ratio and you probably need to preserve the semi-detached character with the existing building, as building in the second row is not usually allowed, you should fully include the existing structure in the planning. Otherwise, you might end up with two, let's say, “dependent, segmented houses” that both lose value if yours is built. You also need to use the parking spaces at the front, so the market value of both houses will shrink significantly just because you don’t want to pay the architect.
Regarding the house itself: it’s hard to say much about the orientation since we don’t have the site plan. I would probably have rotated the house, possibly added a third gable, and of course included the guest room inside the house to create a separation.
A house lives and dies by the staircase... here, the staircase location makes the living room unusable as anything other than a hallway and passage area. What is this stairwell in the ground floor even for?
Another staircase to the attic—why?
The door is crammed into the corner, completely unacceptable. The entire living area faces away. If you draw real sofas instead of those seating cubes, you can see how impractical it is.
The kitchen is not ergonomic but oversized, the windows are symmetrically forced, drainage pipes for the toilets are missing, and load-bearing walls could be problematic here. Still, this is nothing more than a very ordinary but poorly designed detached house.
What are the roof windows in the dormers supposed to achieve?
A storage room heated by a chimney shaft is also not sensible.
The toilet in the children’s bathroom is below the 2-meter (6 ft 7 in) clearance line.
Therefore, I would definitely start planning with the existing building, not without it.
Hyponex schrieb:
Who planned this:
- Architect And I am the Emperor of China.
This all seems to be a case of misplaced priorities: the floor plans look as if they were developed from a photo of the exterior. Even the ground floor, which curves widely around a block containing stairs and a storage room, would have been enough reason for me to crumple up the drawing and start over. Several of my school friends are architects, and I also have a cousin by marriage who is one. But that doesn’t make me an architect.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
11ant schrieb:
And I’m the Emperor of China.
This all seems like a case of misplaced priorities: the floor plans look as if they were developed from a photo of the outside appearance. Even the ground floor, which curves around a block containing the stairs and storage room, would have been reason enough for me to scrap the drawing and start over. Several of my school friends are architects, as is a cousin by marriage. But I am not an architect.Good morning... unfortunately, yes...
They are very familiar with the area near us and do many projects in the second row / extensions, etc. Accordingly, they have good connections to the building authority, which is how we came across them a few months ago...
Lately, however, we have been having more and more doubts (in recent weeks, they have received many negative reviews for projects from 5-6 years ago...), so we are seriously reconsidering.
Here is the ground floor plan from the day before yesterday; I removed the data here due to privacy reasons...
PS. Attached is the cadastral map; you can see the neighbor’s house, where a building was constructed in the second row. I quickly marked the new house on it.
North is at the top.
PS. I will write something about the plot shortly.
@ypg
Hello Yvonne,
Thank you very much for your assessment!
You are actually right, you really have to weigh the decision carefully when it comes to the basement!
We are torn between the space issue. On one hand, it’s the 10sqm (100 square feet) that would then be missing from the living area. On the other hand, it’s the “storage options” that would be lacking.
Of course, the room next to the fireplace is completely out of place.
There are no skylights in the dormer; those are supposed to be the "children’s desks."
And of course, as the current layout is (see this morning’s picture), the living room is unusable because it’s a “through room.”
So as I see it, we still have a lot of work ahead. I’m considering having the interior design done by a different architect, and using this one only for the contacts needed for the building permit / planning permission, nothing more...
PS.
about the PLOT:
Unfortunately, the city requires that parking spaces (2 per house) be located on the street side where the old house is.
We have a relatively long plot (I’m showing you how long it is here!).
We actually have a total of 4 parcels that are between two streets!
That means, in theory, access could be made from the other street side. This could also be where the construction entrance is set up, which could be used “later on” as well.
However, since the two upper parcels (72+75) are outside the city’s development plan from the 1980s, we are not officially allowed to create paths or access from that side (and are not allowed to build there either... which we would actually like to do... but probably in 10-15-20 years we might be able to build a new house there...).
Access must instead be from the other parcels (73+74).
What will happen in a few years is still uncertain.
Top = North
Hello Yvonne,
Thank you very much for your assessment!
You are actually right, you really have to weigh the decision carefully when it comes to the basement!
We are torn between the space issue. On one hand, it’s the 10sqm (100 square feet) that would then be missing from the living area. On the other hand, it’s the “storage options” that would be lacking.
Of course, the room next to the fireplace is completely out of place.
There are no skylights in the dormer; those are supposed to be the "children’s desks."
And of course, as the current layout is (see this morning’s picture), the living room is unusable because it’s a “through room.”
So as I see it, we still have a lot of work ahead. I’m considering having the interior design done by a different architect, and using this one only for the contacts needed for the building permit / planning permission, nothing more...
PS.
about the PLOT:
Unfortunately, the city requires that parking spaces (2 per house) be located on the street side where the old house is.
We have a relatively long plot (I’m showing you how long it is here!).
We actually have a total of 4 parcels that are between two streets!
That means, in theory, access could be made from the other street side. This could also be where the construction entrance is set up, which could be used “later on” as well.
However, since the two upper parcels (72+75) are outside the city’s development plan from the 1980s, we are not officially allowed to create paths or access from that side (and are not allowed to build there either... which we would actually like to do... but probably in 10-15-20 years we might be able to build a new house there...).
Access must instead be from the other parcels (73+74).
What will happen in a few years is still uncertain.
Top = North
Similar topics