ᐅ Floor plan for two semi-detached houses – wide and narrow or square-shaped
Created on: 1 Feb 2022 23:26
S
smartsurfer85
Currently, there is a single-family house on the plot, built in 1961. The long-term tenant recently passed away. Since a full renovation of the existing house seems too expensive and complex to me, I would like to have a complete semi-detached house built instead, consisting of two mirrored halves.
I plan to keep one half of the semi-detached house and rent it out. The second half I either want to rent out as well or sell—either immediately after completion if the project costs exceed my financial means, or later (for example, after 10 years).
The plot is rather long and narrow, so standard floor plans do not fit directly. The usual semi-detached house layouts tend to be “long and narrow” rather than “wide and short” or “square.” A wider layout does not necessarily seem better for usable rooms. How much larger than 8.80m x 7.80m (29 ft x 26 ft) should each half be? (Dimensions taken from the plot with some distance left for garden space toward neighbors, positioning the building volume accordingly; there is no strict need to adhere exactly to these, it's simply a starting point.)
Since I have no clear idea of the required minimum size yet, I started designing a basic floor plan.
I also want to use this draft to compare prices from different general contractors.
I generated two different variants (plans for the ground floor, upper floor, and attic are still pending).
What improvements can be made? Do you have any other ideas?
Site sketch: plot (dark blue) with planned parking spaces, pathway, and building volume
Variant 1:
Variant 2:
Plot size: 499m² (5373 sq ft)
Slope: No
Floor area ratio: §34 Baugesetzbuch (Building Code)
Plot ratio: §34 Baugesetzbuch (Building Code)
Building envelope, building line, and boundary lines
Edge construction: 2.5m (8 ft) setback from the property line
Number of parking spaces: 2 per semi-detached half = 4 total
Number of storeys: 2
Roof type: Gable roof
Style: Classic
Orientation: North
Maximum heights/restrictions
Further requirements
Client Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: Solid construction
Basement, storeys: Preferably no basement for cost reasons; ground floor, upper floor, and attic
Number of occupants, age: Target group is a family with 1–3 children
Space requirements for ground floor, upper floor, attic: approx. 120–150m² (1290–1615 sq ft)
Office: For family use or home office? Home office, 1–2 offices
Guest bedrooms per year:
Open or closed architecture: Open
Conservative or modern construction: Conservative
Open kitchen, kitchen island: Yes
Number of dining seats: 6–8
Fireplace: No
Music / stereo wall: No
Balcony, roof terrace: No
Garage, carport: Possibly carport
Garden for vegetables, greenhouse: No
Other requests / special details / daily routine, including reasons why this or that should or should not be included: Simple floor plan to reduce costs, garden area preferably facing south with about 4.70m (15.5 ft) to potentially minimal 4m (13 ft) distance to neighbors to allow good use of a terrace.
House Design
Planned by:
- Do-it-yourself: Yes
What do you particularly like? Why? Variant 1: Living/dining on the ground floor allows better use of space; Variant 2: room layout on the upper floor offers better usable rooms.
What do you not like? Why? Variant 1: Utility room on the ground floor is accessible only through the guest bathroom.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: Unknown so far; floor plan serves as a basis for price inquiries.
Personal price limit for house including fixtures: –
Preferred heating technology: Air source heat pump
If you had to give up something, which details or upgrades?
- Can give up: Bay window, basement
- Cannot give up: Utility room on the ground floor
Why is the design the way it currently is?
Based on examples of semi-detached houses, which are usually “long and narrow,” while here “short and wide” / “square” is needed. An additional challenge is accommodating technical rooms without a basement.
What is the most important / fundamental question about the floor plan summarized in 130 characters?
Size optimization: The current exterior dimensions of 8.80m x 7.80m (29 ft x 26 ft) seem really tight. How much larger, and with which layout variant (1, 2, or completely different)?
I plan to keep one half of the semi-detached house and rent it out. The second half I either want to rent out as well or sell—either immediately after completion if the project costs exceed my financial means, or later (for example, after 10 years).
The plot is rather long and narrow, so standard floor plans do not fit directly. The usual semi-detached house layouts tend to be “long and narrow” rather than “wide and short” or “square.” A wider layout does not necessarily seem better for usable rooms. How much larger than 8.80m x 7.80m (29 ft x 26 ft) should each half be? (Dimensions taken from the plot with some distance left for garden space toward neighbors, positioning the building volume accordingly; there is no strict need to adhere exactly to these, it's simply a starting point.)
Since I have no clear idea of the required minimum size yet, I started designing a basic floor plan.
I also want to use this draft to compare prices from different general contractors.
I generated two different variants (plans for the ground floor, upper floor, and attic are still pending).
What improvements can be made? Do you have any other ideas?
Site sketch: plot (dark blue) with planned parking spaces, pathway, and building volume
Variant 1:
Variant 2:
Plot size: 499m² (5373 sq ft)
Slope: No
Floor area ratio: §34 Baugesetzbuch (Building Code)
Plot ratio: §34 Baugesetzbuch (Building Code)
Building envelope, building line, and boundary lines
Edge construction: 2.5m (8 ft) setback from the property line
Number of parking spaces: 2 per semi-detached half = 4 total
Number of storeys: 2
Roof type: Gable roof
Style: Classic
Orientation: North
Maximum heights/restrictions
Further requirements
Client Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: Solid construction
Basement, storeys: Preferably no basement for cost reasons; ground floor, upper floor, and attic
Number of occupants, age: Target group is a family with 1–3 children
Space requirements for ground floor, upper floor, attic: approx. 120–150m² (1290–1615 sq ft)
Office: For family use or home office? Home office, 1–2 offices
Guest bedrooms per year:
Open or closed architecture: Open
Conservative or modern construction: Conservative
Open kitchen, kitchen island: Yes
Number of dining seats: 6–8
Fireplace: No
Music / stereo wall: No
Balcony, roof terrace: No
Garage, carport: Possibly carport
Garden for vegetables, greenhouse: No
Other requests / special details / daily routine, including reasons why this or that should or should not be included: Simple floor plan to reduce costs, garden area preferably facing south with about 4.70m (15.5 ft) to potentially minimal 4m (13 ft) distance to neighbors to allow good use of a terrace.
House Design
Planned by:
- Do-it-yourself: Yes
What do you particularly like? Why? Variant 1: Living/dining on the ground floor allows better use of space; Variant 2: room layout on the upper floor offers better usable rooms.
What do you not like? Why? Variant 1: Utility room on the ground floor is accessible only through the guest bathroom.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: Unknown so far; floor plan serves as a basis for price inquiries.
Personal price limit for house including fixtures: –
Preferred heating technology: Air source heat pump
If you had to give up something, which details or upgrades?
- Can give up: Bay window, basement
- Cannot give up: Utility room on the ground floor
Why is the design the way it currently is?
Based on examples of semi-detached houses, which are usually “long and narrow,” while here “short and wide” / “square” is needed. An additional challenge is accommodating technical rooms without a basement.
What is the most important / fundamental question about the floor plan summarized in 130 characters?
Size optimization: The current exterior dimensions of 8.80m x 7.80m (29 ft x 26 ft) seem really tight. How much larger, and with which layout variant (1, 2, or completely different)?
I’m not sure if these really fit the plot better, but I’ve found floor plans that might be more suitable in terms of layout under “two-family house” rather than “semi-detached house.” The Massa House FamilyStyle 20.04 F is almost like a semi-detached house except for a shared utility room (and probably different fire protection regulations, etc.). The Heinz von Heiden two-family house 490 has one apartment per floor.
They still seem a bit tight for the plot to me, but maybe you’ll find some inspiration for floor plans or other helpful ideas if you adjust your search a bit.
They still seem a bit tight for the plot to me, but maybe you’ll find some inspiration for floor plans or other helpful ideas if you adjust your search a bit.
mayglow schrieb:
"Two-family house" (instead of semi-detached house) The original poster plans both, meaning a multi-family house.
I’ll correct myself: what will be planned probably depends on the financial situation—the more rent or income, the better for the original poster.
This is a very poor basis: whether a multi-family house is allowed is doubtful, as is the height. Setback requirements also depend on building heights, so from the way you and @smartsurfer85 are approaching this, I don’t see anything smart or—frankly—helpful for building apartments or houses.
You should consult a specialist or the building authority to find out what you are actually permitted to build. For small plots where something large is planned, it’s best to hire an architect who can estimate during the consultation how much floor area and how many parking spaces are roughly possible. However, large projects also involve significant financial commitments and must be approved by a lending bank. I think you may have gone off track regarding “smart housing.” Now that half a year has passed, the seriousness of your house construction should be questioned, shouldn’t it?
ypg schrieb:
Now that half a year has passed, shouldn't the seriousness of your house building project be questioned? Especially because the original poster still seems unable to get a binding statement on the maximum allowable building area from the authorities. In that time, I would have already had a complete preliminary building inquiry answered right in front of me.
ypg schrieb:
The original poster plans both, so a multi-family house.
I’ll correct myself: “planned” probably depends on the financial situation – the more rental income or earnings, the better for the original poster. Yes, exactly because it’s not completely finalized yet, I thought it might be worth looking for inspiration in different directions. I was also fairly sure I had seen quite wide but less deep semi-detached houses before (like what the original poster initially was looking for), but I haven’t really found anything suitable so far. Maybe it was actually a real estate listing with architect’s design or something, or it was deeper than I thought. Under 10m (33 feet) depth becomes really tight when you just browse through floor plans that builders usually show on their websites. At Heinz von Heiden I found the semi-detached house S840, which is admittedly too large, but according to their listed references they have built smaller versions before. Still, the terrace is usually planned on the long side there, which wouldn’t really work in this case, so the question is how useful that example really is as a template.
I actually find the question quite interesting whether it would be possible to put two semi-detached houses side by side, and if so, what would be the best way to do it. Do you make them as deep as possible (around 15m (49 feet) minus the minimum setback = roughly 9m (30 feet) depth) and then position terraces on the east and west sides? I’d find the west side quite nice, but the east side not so much facing the parking areas... Or do you try to make it as “flat” as possible (only 6–7m (20–23 feet) depth?? Almost like a row house joined only on the short side...) and place a small terrace on the south or maybe even north side? A south terrace would face the wall of the multi-family house, which doesn’t sound very appealing, but a north terrace can also have its charm. On the other hand, there would be no garden then, so that option is less attractive. It really sounds more like a job for an architect, and yes, whether the local authorities would approve it AND whether it makes financial sense at all is definitely very questionable 😉
mayglow schrieb:
I was also sure that I had seen fairly wide but shallower semi-detached houses before (something like what the thread starter was initially looking for),Something like that is currently being built in our area. A floor plan for it is straightforward. By the way, it is a single-story building: the long sides of the roof have dormers for the attic rooms.mayglow schrieb:
I think the west side would be quite nice, but the east side less so, especially facing the parking lots...By the way, I mixed up east and west and can’t correct it. Oops.