ᐅ Floor Plan Feedback for Single-Family Home for 4-5 People, 200 sqm on a 500 sqm Plot in Baden-Württemberg
Created on: 10 Jul 2025 14:13
K
KJaneway
Hello dear forum,
Our concrete building planning is slowly progressing. We were fortunate to purchase a nice plot with an (too old) existing building at a good price, and now want to invest the saved money into building the house. The existing building has been unheated and empty for 30 years and has some broken windows. It is weathered, moldy, and damp both inside and out. An advantage is that it has already been partially gutted and contains no hazardous materials. Initial demolition quotes estimate all-inclusive costs at about 30,000 EUR. This money is already reserved and not included in the construction budget.
Here is the questionnaire:
Development Plan / Restrictions
The development plan dates from the 1930s. It is still valid, but many approved deviations exist in the neighborhood. We can review what has already been approved and have a chance to get similar approvals. The plan specifies a building line 4m (13 feet) from the street along the east side of the house. The east-west orientation is defined by the neighboring buildings in the same block.
One full story and two full stories plus an attic story are allowable. A pitched roof with a slope of about 50° must be constructed. We are currently planning two full stories.
Plot size
512sqm (about 5500 sq ft), almost square (see floor plan)
Slope
Slightly sloping toward the street (see cross-section)
Parking spaces
2
Maximum heights / limits
The building should blend into the neighborhood. The designer has planned the building height to continue the existing roofline in the row of houses.
Client Requirements
KFW40 house, approximately 150-170sqm (about 1,600-1,830 sq ft) (this was the initial wish, although my wife wanted it slightly larger). That is what we are aiming for now.
Number of people, ages
2 adults + 2 children (ages 3 and 6) + temporarily an au pair for the next few years. Possibly a third child later. Who can really predict so far ahead? + 1-4 cats.
Space requirements per floor:
There is a bit of a history here: Originally, we wanted all rooms distributed over two full stories. Then the planner told us that the attic story must also be included at least. So we thought: why not use it, make the house footprint a bit smaller, and distribute rooms over three stories. Hence, including the attic:
Basement: Technical room (ventilation system with heat recovery, heat pump, photovoltaics inverter plus battery, washing machine + dryer), hobby and workroom (home office, gaming, painting, sports, etc.) + storage space.
Ground floor: Living room about 35sqm (about 375 sq ft) was the guideline, plus a separate kitchen. Guest toilet and storage closet. Pantry optional. Large cloakroom area.
Upper floor: 3 equally sized children’s rooms for the kids and au pair. Plus a suitable bathroom where a stacked washer-dryer could be installed if climbing up and down gets tiring. Central access to the balcony (which should be enclosed for the cats so they can go outside if the door is open).
Attic: Parents’ area: bedroom, clothes storage + bathroom.
Overnight guests per year
Primarily one long-term guest for 2 to 4 years (au pair). Occasional overnight visitors are rare. Depending on temperature, I would accommodate them either in the living room or the hobby cellar.
Open or closed architecture
Rather closed.
Conservative or modern style
Not sure what the difference is.
Open kitchen, kitchen island
Definitely a closed kitchen. Although a kitchen island is drawn in, I don’t see it fitting well in the space.
Number of dining seats
6 to 8 in the living area.
Fireplace
No.
Music / stereo wall
Um, if that means a TV wall: yes, but for separate music no. Our musical tastes differ too much. We mostly listen with headphones.
Balcony, rooftop terrace
Balcony desired. Initially for the cats. Later maybe for the children when they hang out there with friends.
Garage, carport
Preference is a wooden carport for 2 cars with a shed behind it. The planner thinks a prefabricated garage (6x9m (20x30 ft)) is cheaper due to its all-in nature.
Utility garden, greenhouse
Not initially. Lots of play area for the children. Maybe later, possibly a small garden patch. A rainwater cistern for garden irrigation would be welcome.
House design
Designed by:
An independent building planner (who also supervises construction) collaborating with an independent architect.
What do you particularly like? Why?
We really like the attic (though we are considering adding a dormer in the dressing room). The 4 equally sized rooms on the upper floor promise a lot of flexibility.
The ground floor has a suitable living room and a nice kitchen, which can be expanded by a pantry depending on preferences and kitchen design. That is not decided yet.
What do you dislike? Why?
Since we have a child with behavioral challenges, we would like to enclose the stairs. This is rather not possible here. Overall, the house has grown larger than we wanted (mainly because of the attic). The guest toilet and storage room on the ground floor feel quite small.
Price estimate according to architect/planner:
Enclosed volume * 650 EUR per cbm = approx. 800,000 EUR turnkey with individual contracts including garage, additional costs, and VAT. Plus outdoor work and photovoltaics.
Personal price limit for the house including fittings:
850,000 EUR is an emotional limit for us. Besides the paid-off land, we currently have 350,000 EUR in liquid equity. An initial bank meeting indicated a financing framework up to about 500,000 EUR including a 170,000 EUR loan through the KFW 300 program. Unfortunately, we do not qualify for the L-Bank Z20 loan.
We plan to have a professional cost estimator review the figures for a more reliable cost forecast. After that, there might be a revision round. The estimator’s planning currently assumes a maximum level of equipment.
Preferred heating technology:
Heat pump (no district heating available). Ground-source heat pump preferred to avoid noise and therefore conflict potential with neighbors. But a quiet air-to-water heat pump is also possible. The drilling costs are never really recouped. The trench collector system, often recommended in a neighboring forum, is also an option, though probably not as a DIY installation. Photovoltaics for powering the heat pump is mandatory anyway, as we are building in Baden-Württemberg near Stuttgart.
If you had to compromise, on which details/expansions?
Haha, it depends who you ask among us:
-We could do without:
Pantry
Bathroom size on the upper floor
Possibly the 3rd children’s room on the upper floor. In that case, finishing the basement with living height would be considered.
Balcony (would hurt us quite a bit)
Dormer in the attic (not planned at all here)
Possibly the extra-long part of the garage if there would be an equivalent garden shed instead.
-We could not do without:
Large parents’ bathroom with a two-person bathtub
Storage = usable floor space
Hobby and workroom.
Why is the design like it is now?
Yes, we already like it quite a bit. All wishes were incorporated, even if the house overall could be about 20sqm smaller. That is difficult without making the rooms smaller at the same time.
Which wishes were implemented by the architect?
Almost all of them. Some he actually dissuaded us from during the planning because they were too expensive, not feasible, or impractical.
What do you consider particularly good or bad about it?
Well, it’s a somewhat large standard single-family house, I would say. We would gladly reduce the total floor area a bit more. We probably have to after the cost estimator’s results come in (if they come) and show we are well above our budget limit.
I expect we will have to negotiate hard about the first round of downsizing once we have the estimator’s results. I would appreciate your feedback on that and on the floor plan in general.
First, here are the site plans: (public roads marked in green. There are two roads adjacent to the plot: on the east and south sides.
Here is the section through the building: We are also considering leaving the attic open so that one can see up to the roof ridge and use the exposed beams as a design feature. Note the lower basement that clearly serves a utility purpose.
Now the floor plans from bottom to top:
Basement:
Ground floor:
Upper floor:
Attic:
Now I look forward to your comments and am ready to answer any questions. If I have forgotten anything important, I will add it later.
Thank you and see you soon.
Our concrete building planning is slowly progressing. We were fortunate to purchase a nice plot with an (too old) existing building at a good price, and now want to invest the saved money into building the house. The existing building has been unheated and empty for 30 years and has some broken windows. It is weathered, moldy, and damp both inside and out. An advantage is that it has already been partially gutted and contains no hazardous materials. Initial demolition quotes estimate all-inclusive costs at about 30,000 EUR. This money is already reserved and not included in the construction budget.
Here is the questionnaire:
Development Plan / Restrictions
The development plan dates from the 1930s. It is still valid, but many approved deviations exist in the neighborhood. We can review what has already been approved and have a chance to get similar approvals. The plan specifies a building line 4m (13 feet) from the street along the east side of the house. The east-west orientation is defined by the neighboring buildings in the same block.
One full story and two full stories plus an attic story are allowable. A pitched roof with a slope of about 50° must be constructed. We are currently planning two full stories.
Plot size
512sqm (about 5500 sq ft), almost square (see floor plan)
Slope
Slightly sloping toward the street (see cross-section)
Parking spaces
2
Maximum heights / limits
The building should blend into the neighborhood. The designer has planned the building height to continue the existing roofline in the row of houses.
Client Requirements
KFW40 house, approximately 150-170sqm (about 1,600-1,830 sq ft) (this was the initial wish, although my wife wanted it slightly larger). That is what we are aiming for now.
Number of people, ages
2 adults + 2 children (ages 3 and 6) + temporarily an au pair for the next few years. Possibly a third child later. Who can really predict so far ahead? + 1-4 cats.
Space requirements per floor:
There is a bit of a history here: Originally, we wanted all rooms distributed over two full stories. Then the planner told us that the attic story must also be included at least. So we thought: why not use it, make the house footprint a bit smaller, and distribute rooms over three stories. Hence, including the attic:
Basement: Technical room (ventilation system with heat recovery, heat pump, photovoltaics inverter plus battery, washing machine + dryer), hobby and workroom (home office, gaming, painting, sports, etc.) + storage space.
Ground floor: Living room about 35sqm (about 375 sq ft) was the guideline, plus a separate kitchen. Guest toilet and storage closet. Pantry optional. Large cloakroom area.
Upper floor: 3 equally sized children’s rooms for the kids and au pair. Plus a suitable bathroom where a stacked washer-dryer could be installed if climbing up and down gets tiring. Central access to the balcony (which should be enclosed for the cats so they can go outside if the door is open).
Attic: Parents’ area: bedroom, clothes storage + bathroom.
Overnight guests per year
Primarily one long-term guest for 2 to 4 years (au pair). Occasional overnight visitors are rare. Depending on temperature, I would accommodate them either in the living room or the hobby cellar.
Open or closed architecture
Rather closed.
Conservative or modern style
Not sure what the difference is.
Open kitchen, kitchen island
Definitely a closed kitchen. Although a kitchen island is drawn in, I don’t see it fitting well in the space.
Number of dining seats
6 to 8 in the living area.
Fireplace
No.
Music / stereo wall
Um, if that means a TV wall: yes, but for separate music no. Our musical tastes differ too much. We mostly listen with headphones.
Balcony, rooftop terrace
Balcony desired. Initially for the cats. Later maybe for the children when they hang out there with friends.
Garage, carport
Preference is a wooden carport for 2 cars with a shed behind it. The planner thinks a prefabricated garage (6x9m (20x30 ft)) is cheaper due to its all-in nature.
Utility garden, greenhouse
Not initially. Lots of play area for the children. Maybe later, possibly a small garden patch. A rainwater cistern for garden irrigation would be welcome.
House design
Designed by:
An independent building planner (who also supervises construction) collaborating with an independent architect.
What do you particularly like? Why?
We really like the attic (though we are considering adding a dormer in the dressing room). The 4 equally sized rooms on the upper floor promise a lot of flexibility.
The ground floor has a suitable living room and a nice kitchen, which can be expanded by a pantry depending on preferences and kitchen design. That is not decided yet.
What do you dislike? Why?
Since we have a child with behavioral challenges, we would like to enclose the stairs. This is rather not possible here. Overall, the house has grown larger than we wanted (mainly because of the attic). The guest toilet and storage room on the ground floor feel quite small.
Price estimate according to architect/planner:
Enclosed volume * 650 EUR per cbm = approx. 800,000 EUR turnkey with individual contracts including garage, additional costs, and VAT. Plus outdoor work and photovoltaics.
Personal price limit for the house including fittings:
850,000 EUR is an emotional limit for us. Besides the paid-off land, we currently have 350,000 EUR in liquid equity. An initial bank meeting indicated a financing framework up to about 500,000 EUR including a 170,000 EUR loan through the KFW 300 program. Unfortunately, we do not qualify for the L-Bank Z20 loan.
We plan to have a professional cost estimator review the figures for a more reliable cost forecast. After that, there might be a revision round. The estimator’s planning currently assumes a maximum level of equipment.
Preferred heating technology:
Heat pump (no district heating available). Ground-source heat pump preferred to avoid noise and therefore conflict potential with neighbors. But a quiet air-to-water heat pump is also possible. The drilling costs are never really recouped. The trench collector system, often recommended in a neighboring forum, is also an option, though probably not as a DIY installation. Photovoltaics for powering the heat pump is mandatory anyway, as we are building in Baden-Württemberg near Stuttgart.
If you had to compromise, on which details/expansions?
Haha, it depends who you ask among us:
-We could do without:
Pantry
Bathroom size on the upper floor
Possibly the 3rd children’s room on the upper floor. In that case, finishing the basement with living height would be considered.
Balcony (would hurt us quite a bit)
Dormer in the attic (not planned at all here)
Possibly the extra-long part of the garage if there would be an equivalent garden shed instead.
-We could not do without:
Large parents’ bathroom with a two-person bathtub
Storage = usable floor space
Hobby and workroom.
Why is the design like it is now?
Yes, we already like it quite a bit. All wishes were incorporated, even if the house overall could be about 20sqm smaller. That is difficult without making the rooms smaller at the same time.
Which wishes were implemented by the architect?
Almost all of them. Some he actually dissuaded us from during the planning because they were too expensive, not feasible, or impractical.
What do you consider particularly good or bad about it?
Well, it’s a somewhat large standard single-family house, I would say. We would gladly reduce the total floor area a bit more. We probably have to after the cost estimator’s results come in (if they come) and show we are well above our budget limit.
I expect we will have to negotiate hard about the first round of downsizing once we have the estimator’s results. I would appreciate your feedback on that and on the floor plan in general.
First, here are the site plans: (public roads marked in green. There are two roads adjacent to the plot: on the east and south sides.
Here is the section through the building: We are also considering leaving the attic open so that one can see up to the roof ridge and use the exposed beams as a design feature. Note the lower basement that clearly serves a utility purpose.
Now the floor plans from bottom to top:
Basement:
Ground floor:
Upper floor:
Attic:
Now I look forward to your comments and am ready to answer any questions. If I have forgotten anything important, I will add it later.
Thank you and see you soon.
KJaneway schrieb:
A pitched roof with a slope of "approximately 50°" must be built. 38 and "approximately 50" is not just a significant difference in clothing size.
KJaneway schrieb:
I think once we have the calculator result, we will have tough negotiations over the initial cost reductions. Wrong order: cost verification should already be done during the preliminary design phase (>key decisions during the >resting period). Anyone who rushes straight through to design stage 3 or even 4 has way too much money.
KJaneway schrieb:
A full basement is still under consideration. We could probably manage with a partial basement. The planner said that by removing half of it, we could save around 50,000€ (about $54,000). If the dashed line represents the current terrain, then I don’t see a basement at all here. Do I really have to translate the 11ant >basement rule still into German as a foreign language?
KJaneway schrieb:
Thinking out loud: leaving out the basement means the technical room, storage, and hobby room have to be moved upstairs. Also, we will need to buy fill material since the basement excavation is already done. Draw in the existing basement—how dilapidated is it really?
KJaneway schrieb:
Initial demolition quotes assume all-in costs of 30,000€ (about $32,000). This money is already reserved and is not included in the construction budget. How many gods are you praying to that this amount will be sufficient?
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
KJaneway schrieb:
EDIT: One idea might be to use the garage roof or part of it as a balcony, if local building regulations allow it.This is a question for design phase 1!KJaneway schrieb:
I believe that every dollar well invested during the planning phase saves ten times as much later on.Maybe you should remind yourself of that opinion (and kindly recommend it be applied).https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
G
Gerddieter10 Jul 2025 18:37A small input regarding the basement consideration: we had a similar situation in our planning – two full stories plus a penthouse and a basement underneath. Since that results in a pretty large house in terms of square meters and cost, we started trying to reduce the size of the house, make it narrower, etc. But it was a dead end to compromise the beautiful, functional floor plan because of the basement.
Then we thought about why we actually needed the basement with its four rooms – mostly for technical equipment and storage. We don’t have any underground hobbies – just expensive storage space.
So we got rid of the basement, kept the above-ground floors in their perfect size, and even added some space for technical/utility rooms and storage.
We celebrate that decision every day, that we don’t have a basement hole under our stairs that only collects clutter, is dark, and requires maintenance and cleaning. Laundry is done on the ground floor near the technical area, and we have a nice, cozy closet and storage room on the upper floor, without any mustiness or anything like that…
That was one of the best decisions in our planning process.
From our perspective, forget about a partial basement – any material you save there has to be spent elsewhere on supports, foundations, etc. And the excavation hole for a partial basement is initially just as large as for a full basement. You still need stairs, so even if the basement is half the size, you don’t save half the cost.
My general contractor even said he could reduce the basement size if I wanted, but the price would remain the same…
Gerddieter
Then we thought about why we actually needed the basement with its four rooms – mostly for technical equipment and storage. We don’t have any underground hobbies – just expensive storage space.
So we got rid of the basement, kept the above-ground floors in their perfect size, and even added some space for technical/utility rooms and storage.
We celebrate that decision every day, that we don’t have a basement hole under our stairs that only collects clutter, is dark, and requires maintenance and cleaning. Laundry is done on the ground floor near the technical area, and we have a nice, cozy closet and storage room on the upper floor, without any mustiness or anything like that…
That was one of the best decisions in our planning process.
From our perspective, forget about a partial basement – any material you save there has to be spent elsewhere on supports, foundations, etc. And the excavation hole for a partial basement is initially just as large as for a full basement. You still need stairs, so even if the basement is half the size, you don’t save half the cost.
My general contractor even said he could reduce the basement size if I wanted, but the price would remain the same…
Gerddieter
Gerddieter schrieb:
Then we decided to get rid of the basement, kept the above-ground floors at their perfect size, and even added some extra space for the technical room/laundry and storage. I’m getting more and more curious about your house!
Gerddieter schrieb:
From our point of view, forget about a partial basement. The materials you save there you’ll have to spend elsewhere on supports, foundations, etc. [...] You still need a staircase anyway, so even if the basement is half the size, you don’t save half the costs. No, only about 30% – see also: "Partial basement: The solution between yes and no?".
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Good morning,
Wow, there’s a lot to respond to. First of all, thank you very much for the valuable input.
Do you mean converting the sloping roof areas that are too low to stand in into closets? That’s exactly our plan. We even considered placing the bed on the gable side under the window.
Hmm, yes, one could add a small extension from the kitchen to the garden. I will sketch that out. This could be turned into a balcony on the upper floor and the balcony could run along the building side from the south end to the north end. With a 1 to 2-meter (3 to 6.5 feet) extension, the kitchen could easily be enlarged by 5 to 10 square meters (50 to 110 square feet) and become less narrow. We are still considering whether we really want the pantry or prefer to invest the space into the kitchen. It would still be a narrow room but definitely improved by a better side length ratio.
To skip the basement, I would need about 15 square meters (160 square feet) utility room on the ground floor, additional storage space on both ground and upper floors, and the hobby room on the upper floor. Here, one could extend the rear addition (2 meters / 6.5 feet) up to the top floor. That would generate about 25 square meters (270 square feet). Additionally, the house could be extended by 1 meter (3 feet) directly next to the garage, adding roughly 30 square meters (320 square feet). A total of 55 square meters (590 square feet). That would cover 15 square meters (160 square feet) for the utility room, 10 square meters (110 square feet) added to the kitchen, plus 15 square meters (160 square feet) each for hobby and storage rooms. Could work. Am I thinking in the right direction? Or have I misunderstood something?
Hmm, I need to ask the planner again here. He first planned a house with a 38° roof pitch and changed it to 45° for the second draft. But the plan still says 38°, so maybe a typo. We were actually hoping for a steeper roof to have a bit more clear height > 2 meters (6.5 feet) in the attic.
The dashed line is the terrain. I have read your website thoroughly, though I didn’t understand everything and internalized even less. After all, I don’t deal with this daily. We are facing the decision: basement and smaller house, or no basement and larger house. Financially, according to your basement rule (if I understand it correctly), the second option is more sensible here. However, the plot is not very large and we want a lot of open space. In the end, the decision leans towards the basement (= more space but also somewhat more expensive). But it might be worth revisiting.
Overall, we have already fallen in love with the basement because it provides more room on the plot (= smaller house). But I also see that the ground floor is quite cramped: small entrance hall, small storage, small toilet (that’s sufficient), small kitchen — whether with or without pantry. We like the upper and attic floors in principle (apart from minor details that still need optimization).
Pictures of the old house and photos of the basement: (the small site plan is 1:500)
Wow, there’s a lot to respond to. First of all, thank you very much for the valuable input.
ypg schrieb:We will definitely look into that. Gaining space in the attic would be great. On the other hand, we have already grown a bit fond of this wellness area. Isn’t it said that you should first plan what you want and then cut back according to budget? At least, that’s what I heard in the video by Mr. Zink (linked as a second opinion on the 11ants site regarding the basement rule).
I would also turn the master bathroom into a small shower bathroom. The family bathroom is on the children’s floor.
ypg schrieb:
The closets in the attic could be moved into the rear attic space so that behind the 2-meter (6.5 feet) height on the floor there is still decent storage area. As mentioned earlier, opening the dressing room from the hallway.
Do you mean converting the sloping roof areas that are too low to stand in into closets? That’s exactly our plan. We even considered placing the bed on the gable side under the window.
ypg schrieb:Also our plan: a play corner, a scratching post for the cats, etc.
There is nothing to change on the children’s floor at the moment. The gallery offers additional workspace or a play area. Whether to put a TV for the kids there or a craft table, there is definitely room to develop.
ypg schrieb:Okay, that’s the second comment regarding the exterior design. Do you have a search term or an example image on how this could be done? I sense that it’s not the house geometry that’s the problem but rather the appearance created by the windows. We also find that there are too many floor-to-ceiling window elements in the end. I lean strongly towards replacing some with windows with sills (children’s rooms, south-facing living room, kitchen). In the attic, I find the windows quite sensible since there is only one window there. But maybe two wide windows with sills could also fit. My biggest concern is that it might end up too dark in some rooms. Of course, roof windows could also be an option.
What I actually find worth reconsidering is a) the exterior appearance, because it looks like a cheap multi-family house. I would suggest windows with a sill-height in the children’s rooms, possibly double-leaf with a transom window, and different lighting for the stairwell to preserve charm that fits this house form. The Dutch set an example for this charm with this roof pitch.
ypg schrieb:
b) The kitchen: it’s way too small for 5 people. You can tell from the little figure. Only one person fits there.
I also find the entrance area too small for 4-5 people.
I think that with a small extension and revision of the upper ground floor plan, the house could gain — possibly without a basement.
By the way, I see the main access to the terrace rather through the kitchen.
Hmm, yes, one could add a small extension from the kitchen to the garden. I will sketch that out. This could be turned into a balcony on the upper floor and the balcony could run along the building side from the south end to the north end. With a 1 to 2-meter (3 to 6.5 feet) extension, the kitchen could easily be enlarged by 5 to 10 square meters (50 to 110 square feet) and become less narrow. We are still considering whether we really want the pantry or prefer to invest the space into the kitchen. It would still be a narrow room but definitely improved by a better side length ratio.
To skip the basement, I would need about 15 square meters (160 square feet) utility room on the ground floor, additional storage space on both ground and upper floors, and the hobby room on the upper floor. Here, one could extend the rear addition (2 meters / 6.5 feet) up to the top floor. That would generate about 25 square meters (270 square feet). Additionally, the house could be extended by 1 meter (3 feet) directly next to the garage, adding roughly 30 square meters (320 square feet). A total of 55 square meters (590 square feet). That would cover 15 square meters (160 square feet) for the utility room, 10 square meters (110 square feet) added to the kitchen, plus 15 square meters (160 square feet) each for hobby and storage rooms. Could work. Am I thinking in the right direction? Or have I misunderstood something?
11ant schrieb:
38 and "about 50" is a big difference — not only as clothing sizes.
Hmm, I need to ask the planner again here. He first planned a house with a 38° roof pitch and changed it to 45° for the second draft. But the plan still says 38°, so maybe a typo. We were actually hoping for a steeper roof to have a bit more clear height > 2 meters (6.5 feet) in the attic.
11ant schrieb:
If the dashed line is the current terrain, then I don’t see any basement here at all. Do I really have to translate the 11ant > basement rule into German?
The dashed line is the terrain. I have read your website thoroughly, though I didn’t understand everything and internalized even less. After all, I don’t deal with this daily. We are facing the decision: basement and smaller house, or no basement and larger house. Financially, according to your basement rule (if I understand it correctly), the second option is more sensible here. However, the plot is not very large and we want a lot of open space. In the end, the decision leans towards the basement (= more space but also somewhat more expensive). But it might be worth revisiting.
11ant schrieb:See the attached screenshots and photos. Thanks also for this question: it actually makes me reconsider the basement. As I understand it now, the new basement would be almost entirely below the level of the old basement. According to your basement rule, a basement here wouldn’t make sense — at least not economically. Let’s see what wins out: the wish for a basement or a larger house. I have the impression it will also be expensive to keep the old basement as it’s quite high, and presumably you can’t build two full floors plus a steep gable roof above it without overly exceeding neighboring buildings.
Draw the existing basement once — how dilapidated is it really?
11ant schrieb:Our deity here is the head of the local demolition company who walked through the building with me and raved about how simple it is. He sent me an offer of €30,000 for site setup, demolition down to the top of the foundation, disposal, and gutting. The plot will be handed over leveled. Backfill material would be charged separately. The builder must disconnect the electricity (this will add about €2,500 — offer from the network operator including civil engineering is also available).
How many deities are you praying to that this will be enough?
11ant schrieb:Admittedly, it is. In forum discussions, one sometimes jumps between questions of different project phases.
This is a phase 1 (preliminary planning) question!
11ant schrieb:Me too, @Gerddieter. Are the plans available somewhere to see? Could you maybe upload a sketch?
I’m getting more and more curious about your house!
Overall, we have already fallen in love with the basement because it provides more room on the plot (= smaller house). But I also see that the ground floor is quite cramped: small entrance hall, small storage, small toilet (that’s sufficient), small kitchen — whether with or without pantry. We like the upper and attic floors in principle (apart from minor details that still need optimization).
Pictures of the old house and photos of the basement: (the small site plan is 1:500)
KJaneway schrieb:
Isn’t it usually said that you should first plan what you want and only then start cutting the budget? At least that’s what I heard in the video by Mr. Zink (linked on 11ant’s site as a second opinion regarding the basement rule). Secondly, I wouldn’t have linked Mr. Zink if he just echoed my opinion, even if only in Bavarian dialect. Rather, I deliberately included his perspective to provide insight into different experiences and somewhat differing recommendations from another professional.
And first, the (avoidable if you closely follow my advice!) common practice of progressively reducing scope based on the budget is the economically most significant reason why critical decisions (including size calibration) need to happen during the design freeze: so that you don’t start a reduction process in the costly later design phases!
KJaneway schrieb:
I have also read your website thoroughly, though I haven’t understood or internalized everything, which is natural since I don’t deal with this daily. We are currently deciding: basement plus smaller house, or no basement and a larger house. Economically speaking, according to your basement rule (if I understand it correctly), the second option would make more sense here. However, the plot isn’t very large and we want a lot of outdoor space. In the end, we leaned toward the basement (= more space but somewhat more expensive). It might be worthwhile to revisit this decision. The basement rule does not include a second option — which one would that be?
Economically (and it is designed for no other purpose), the rule concludes that a basement on this plot is a luxury. However, this refers to the raw plot; in this specific case, I recommend a sympathetic review of keeping the existing basement!
Anyone who reads my website thoroughly should notice that there is a comment function at the bottom of each post for readers’ questions (and there is also an editorial hotline with landline rates noted at the top of the site).
KJaneway schrieb:
Thanks also for that question: it made me reconsider the basement. As I understand it now, the new basement would be almost entirely below the level of the old one. According to 11ant’s basement rule, that would mean no basement is economically viable here. We’ll see what wins out: desire for a basement or a bigger house.
I get the impression it could be expensive to keep the old basement, especially since it sits quite high and you probably can’t build two full upper floors plus a steep pitched roof on top without significantly surpassing the neighboring buildings. The existing basement is a not fully underground basement by contemporary standards, which gives the house a raised plinth. If I recall correctly, we are dealing with a §34 plot here — so the existing building volume should be a strong benchmark for what is permissible.
KJaneway schrieb:
Admittedly, that’s probably true. In forum discussions, one often jumps back and forth between questions related to different planning phases. I meant that the question of the building form and arrangement should have been discussed with the planner before any drawings were produced!
During the planning phases of Module B, the planner’s billing accelerates noticeably, so the essentials must be firmly established before entering the expensive phases!
KJaneway schrieb:
Okay, that’s already the second comment about the exterior appearance. Do you have a search term or example image I can look at to see how it’s typically done? I gather that the house shape itself isn’t the problem, but rather the look created by the windows. In the end, we also feel there are too many floor-to-ceiling window elements. Too many floor-to-ceiling elements are a hallmark of the current trend — designing as if you’d won the lottery. On the garden level, I typically propose only two exits: one to the terrace and one from the kitchen to the herb garden. On floors that require fall protection, every floor-to-ceiling window is a (decadent) luxury — which is exactly why they are overused in these “replacement villas.”
By “apartment building look,” I assume you mean a facade that suggests that the floor plans on each level are the same. I see this neutrally, as a matter of taste and not a flaw. A cheap or cheap-feeling appearance can usually be avoided at the finishing stage.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Similar topics