ᐅ Floor Plan Single-Family Home with Granny Flat as a Three-Unit Residence
Created on: 5 Jul 2021 06:50
F
florian93
Hello everyone,
I have been a quiet reader here for a long time and have gained a lot of information and ideas from this forum. Many thanks for that!
Since the end of last year, we have been looking into building a house. Initially, we spoke with a few turnkey construction companies. We moved forward with planning more concretely with one company. However, we were never completely satisfied with the results, as we felt the flexibility and individuality were always limited beyond a certain point. Meanwhile, we have turned to an architect from the neighboring village who will support us from planning to the finished house (phases 1-8). We have now reached the point of a "final" draft including a cost estimate.
Development plan/restrictions
Plot size: 709 sqm (7,630 sq ft)
Slope: No
Floor area ratio (FAR): 0.4
Floor space index (FSI): 0.8
Building envelope, building line, and boundary: see plan
Edge construction: garage
Number of parking spaces: 1.5 per residential unit (= 5)
Number of floors: 1.5
Roof type: 38-47° (100-116°F) gable or half-hipped roof
Style: No specification
Orientation: No specification
Maximum height/restrictions: None
Other requirements: None
Client requirements
Style, roof type, building type: Classic-modern, gable roof
Basement, floors: 2 full floors (according to development plan only 1.5 => however, neighbors in the immediate area have been granted permission for 2 as long as the overall height does not exceed 1.5, which requires a lower roof pitch)
Number of people, age:
Space requirements on ground floor and upper floor:
Office: home office
Overnight guests per year: can sleep on the sofa
Open or closed architecture: open
Conservative or modern construction: modern
Open kitchen, kitchen island: open, kitchen island maybe
Number of dining seats: 6
Fireplace: provision for future installation
Music/stereo wall: No
Balcony, roof terrace: No
Garage, carport: garage, but also open to a carport (depending on savings)
Vegetable garden, greenhouse: No, possibly a small utility area in the garden
Other wishes/special features/daily routine, including reasons for choices or exclusions: None
House design
Who designed the plan: architect
What do you especially like? Why?
What do you dislike? Why?
Cost estimate according to architect/planner:
Personal budget limit for the house, including fittings: Is it even possible to define this nowadays?
Preferred heating system: heat pump
If you had to give up something, which features/extensions
- you can live without: fireplace (or just fireplace preparation), smart home (I’m an IT professional and can retrofit it myself later)
- you cannot live without: none
Why does the design look as it does now? For example:
Standard design from the planner? Basic idea is ours + several discussions with the architect
Which wishes were implemented by the architect?
What makes it particularly good or bad in your opinion?
What is the most important/basic question about the floor plan summed up in 130 characters?
I have been a quiet reader here for a long time and have gained a lot of information and ideas from this forum. Many thanks for that!
Since the end of last year, we have been looking into building a house. Initially, we spoke with a few turnkey construction companies. We moved forward with planning more concretely with one company. However, we were never completely satisfied with the results, as we felt the flexibility and individuality were always limited beyond a certain point. Meanwhile, we have turned to an architect from the neighboring village who will support us from planning to the finished house (phases 1-8). We have now reached the point of a "final" draft including a cost estimate.
Development plan/restrictions
Plot size: 709 sqm (7,630 sq ft)
Slope: No
Floor area ratio (FAR): 0.4
Floor space index (FSI): 0.8
Building envelope, building line, and boundary: see plan
Edge construction: garage
Number of parking spaces: 1.5 per residential unit (= 5)
Number of floors: 1.5
Roof type: 38-47° (100-116°F) gable or half-hipped roof
Style: No specification
Orientation: No specification
Maximum height/restrictions: None
Other requirements: None
Client requirements
Style, roof type, building type: Classic-modern, gable roof
Basement, floors: 2 full floors (according to development plan only 1.5 => however, neighbors in the immediate area have been granted permission for 2 as long as the overall height does not exceed 1.5, which requires a lower roof pitch)
Number of people, age:
- Currently: 3 (Dad 27, Mom 25, son 1)
- Future: 4-5 (Dad, Mom, 2-3 children) + 2 in granny flat (parents, in about 5-10 years)
Space requirements on ground floor and upper floor:
- Ground floor + upper floor:
- Size: approx. 160-180 sqm (1,722-1,938 sq ft); inspired by the new build of an acquaintance
- Rooms ground floor: open kitchen/dining/living area + small pantry, office, utility/technical room, guest WC
- Rooms upper floor: large bathroom, master bedroom, 3 children’s rooms
- Granny flat:
- Size: approx. 50 sqm (538 sq ft); based on our old 2-room apartment
- Rooms: open kitchen/dining/living area, bathroom, bedroom
Office: home office
Overnight guests per year: can sleep on the sofa
Open or closed architecture: open
Conservative or modern construction: modern
Open kitchen, kitchen island: open, kitchen island maybe
Number of dining seats: 6
Fireplace: provision for future installation
Music/stereo wall: No
Balcony, roof terrace: No
Garage, carport: garage, but also open to a carport (depending on savings)
Vegetable garden, greenhouse: No, possibly a small utility area in the garden
Other wishes/special features/daily routine, including reasons for choices or exclusions: None
House design
Who designed the plan: architect
What do you especially like? Why?
- Use as a single-family house plus granny flat, with the option to separate into 3 units later, e.g., when children grow older or if renting is desired
- Separate garden areas for the main house and granny flat
- Large windows facing south => lots of daylight (neighbor to the south is quite far away + good privacy to the east thanks to granny flat)
- Garden/terraces on the south side
- Direct access to the garage from inside
- Direct access to the granny flat for times of sole family use
What do you dislike? Why?
- Very dark entrance area
- Concern that the kitchen/dining/living area might be too small or cramped
Cost estimate according to architect/planner:
- Note: everything calculated very generously based on current raw material prices
- All-in: 778k (we already own the serviced land)
- of which 40k are additional construction costs
- of which 35k already planned for furnishings
- of which 50k already planned for outdoor facilities and open spaces
- Resulting in:
- after deductions for subsidies: 662k (3x KfW 40 Plus + energy consultant = 116k)
- after deductions for assured DIY work: 642k
- after deduction of approx. 160k for granny flat (financed by parents): 482k
Personal budget limit for the house, including fittings: Is it even possible to define this nowadays?
Preferred heating system: heat pump
If you had to give up something, which features/extensions
- you can live without: fireplace (or just fireplace preparation), smart home (I’m an IT professional and can retrofit it myself later)
- you cannot live without: none
Why does the design look as it does now? For example:
Standard design from the planner? Basic idea is ours + several discussions with the architect
Which wishes were implemented by the architect?
- Almost all of our wishes
- Staircase with straight steps
What makes it particularly good or bad in your opinion?
- Good: not a run-of-the-mill standard design, visually very appealing (in our opinion)
- Bad: nothing
What is the most important/basic question about the floor plan summed up in 130 characters?
- We would simply like some unbiased opinions/optimizations from third parties
- How can the entrance area be improved in terms of natural light?
Regarding the third residential unit: I’m currently observing this with my parents. In the past, my grandparents lived in the attic. The house has two residential units of over 100sqm (over 1,000 sq ft) each, and yet after they passed away, the apartment remained empty for two or three years. It is currently only rented out again so someone is in the house when my parents are on vacation (camping), and since it’s the neighbor’s son, who was already known beforehand, it feels more comfortable. It’s also a matter of feeling, and if you already own a house, you don’t necessarily want to feel like you’re living in an apartment. Money is often not the main argument, and eventually the 300€ (about $330) a month (after tax, deductions, etc.) might be worth the “extra quality of life” that comes with no one living over your head, instead of dealing with the staircase and hallway situation for the next 25 years.
Also, consider the real costs of the requirements for a multi-family house. Probably more storage space in the stairwell, certificates (for example, fire protection, noise protection), additional emergency exits, 2-3 extra parking spaces (a granny flat often only requires one parking space), 2-3 separate ventilation systems, heat meters, calibrated meters for water and electricity, proper apartment doors... some of the requirements do not come from the KfW funding program. These individual items might only be “small” costs of a few hundred to a few thousand euros each, but the question remains how much of the funding will actually be left in the end. At least the structural conditions should be clearly established from the beginning and not just possible. Someone eventually has to sign off that three residential units were actually created there. I don’t want to sound like a moralist, but at least the doors and ventilation should be included from the start, along with the provisions for electricity and water billing.
“Only” a granny flat is much easier to handle. Also, a planned “all-inclusive rent” (covering utilities) is easier to justify than with three residential units.
For a potentially effective four-figure profit from the additional funding, you end up with unnecessary barriers (extra apartment doors) and a hallway that will only be so-so for eternity. The option of selling and then buying something suitable “in old age” (your parents are doing something similar) might be worth considering for the currently building generation, allowing more freedom in current planning.
I think your plan is cool, the house has charm, is unusual, and offers opportunities. However, I believe there are still some points to clarify—as has been discussed here many times—before the final layout of the rooms is decided. The idea of a shared living area and retreat space for all family members is something where 1+1 might be more than 2.
Also, consider the real costs of the requirements for a multi-family house. Probably more storage space in the stairwell, certificates (for example, fire protection, noise protection), additional emergency exits, 2-3 extra parking spaces (a granny flat often only requires one parking space), 2-3 separate ventilation systems, heat meters, calibrated meters for water and electricity, proper apartment doors... some of the requirements do not come from the KfW funding program. These individual items might only be “small” costs of a few hundred to a few thousand euros each, but the question remains how much of the funding will actually be left in the end. At least the structural conditions should be clearly established from the beginning and not just possible. Someone eventually has to sign off that three residential units were actually created there. I don’t want to sound like a moralist, but at least the doors and ventilation should be included from the start, along with the provisions for electricity and water billing.
“Only” a granny flat is much easier to handle. Also, a planned “all-inclusive rent” (covering utilities) is easier to justify than with three residential units.
For a potentially effective four-figure profit from the additional funding, you end up with unnecessary barriers (extra apartment doors) and a hallway that will only be so-so for eternity. The option of selling and then buying something suitable “in old age” (your parents are doing something similar) might be worth considering for the currently building generation, allowing more freedom in current planning.
I think your plan is cool, the house has charm, is unusual, and offers opportunities. However, I believe there are still some points to clarify—as has been discussed here many times—before the final layout of the rooms is decided. The idea of a shared living area and retreat space for all family members is something where 1+1 might be more than 2.
F
florian937 Jul 2021 11:58borxx schrieb:
Regarding the third dwelling unit: I’m seeing this right now with my parents. In the past, grandpa and grandma lived in the attic. The house has two dwelling units, each over 100sqm (over 1,076 sq ft), and yet after they passed away, the apartment remained empty for two or three years. Currently, it’s rented out again just so someone is in the house when my parents are on vacation (camping), and it’s the neighbor’s son who was already known beforehand. It’s also a matter of feeling, and when you already own a house, you don’t necessarily want it to feel like an apartment. Money often isn’t the main argument here, and eventually, maybe those 300€ (about $320) a month (after taxes, deductions, etc.) are worth the “extra quality of life” that comes from having no one living above your head, rather than being stuck for the next 25 years with the staircase and hallway situation.
Also, calculate what the real costs for the necessities of a multi-family house are. Probably more storage space in the stairwell, required certifications (fire protection, noise insulation, for example), additional emergency exits, 2–3 extra parking spaces (a granny flat or secondary unit often only needs one parking space), 2–3 separate ventilation systems, heat meters, calibrated meters (spaces) for water and electricity, proper apartment doors... some of these requirements are not triggered by the housing promotion programs (such as KfW). These individual items might seem like minor expenses of a few hundred to a few thousand euros each, but the question remains how much of the subsidies will actually cover the costs. At least the structural requirements should be fulfilled from the start and not just be possible options. Someone has to sign off at the end confirming that three dwelling units have actually been created. I don’t want to come across as a moralist, but at least the doors and ventilation should be part of the initial completion, as well as the preparations for separate electricity and water billing.
Having “only” a granny flat is much easier to manage, and a planned “all-inclusive rental” setup is easier to justify than with three dwelling units.
For an effective potential profit in the four-digit range due to additional subsidies, you’re dealing with unnecessary hurdles (extra apartment doors) and a hallway that will only be halfway ideal for eternity. The option to sell and then “buy something suitable in old age” (which your parents do similarly) might be a worthwhile alternative for the currently building generation, allowing more freedom of thought in the current planning.
I think your plan is cool — the house has character, is unusual, and offers possibilities. But I believe there are still several points to clarify, as has already been discussed many times, before finalizing the layout of the rooms. The idea of a shared living area and retreat space for all family members is one where 1+1 might actually equal more than 2.Thanks for the honest, direct but still friendly feedback. This way, both sides can feel comfortable.
In general, we don’t see the upper floor as an option that “we absolutely want to rent out to a stranger.” It’s more in the direction of “the child is old enough and would like to have their own apartment with their partner,” without having to constantly bump into us in the hallway. I see this practiced in my immediate surroundings with an acquaintance. His parents live downstairs, he and his wife with their child live upstairs. And before anyone asks: yes, it works very well.
The number of parking spaces we definitely need wouldn’t bother us much, as it actually eases the parking situation at the narrow turning circle for guests (or later for our own children). Regarding other details such as requirements for meters and so on, we will definitely consult our architect again. I see the three separate ventilation systems more as an advantage (e.g., less noise transfer) than a disadvantage (extra cost). Even if it is often misunderstood: The third subsidy would only be the icing on the cake for us. If, after calculating the extra costs, there’s even a little money left over, we’re happy. If not, it’s not a big deal.
All in all, thank you very much for your warm feedback. We accept it gladly and will incorporate it into our further considerations.
With a proper ventilation system, there is no sound transmission. Before you hear anything through the ventilation, the ceiling will probably collapse first. In our case, every supply and exhaust vent has its own separate duct.
It is really important that your parents envision their future – even if it is uncomfortable. At nullbarriere you can find floor plans, both for bungalows and for individual rooms.
It is really important that your parents envision their future – even if it is uncomfortable. At nullbarriere you can find floor plans, both for bungalows and for individual rooms.
florian93 schrieb:
We are not insisting that the design be implemented exactly as is. It was just a thought experiment. Hmm… better give the architect the task; it’s their job and they expect that not everything will be perfect. The process will lead to the goal here as well.
florian93 schrieb:
More like "the child is old enough and would like to have their own apartment with their partner." florian93 schrieb:
And before anyone asks: yes, it works very well. It can work, but it doesn’t have to.
For now, I would start planning for you and focus on allocating some of the main house’s floor area for the secondary apartment, then create a useful utility room, incorporate a staircase inside, and design the ground floor and upper floor so that you as a family or couple will be happy there. Plan the secondary apartment with a reasonable size, and if the elderly residents aren’t ready yet, rent it out. Something along those lines. Maybe have a connecting room that can serve as an office or later become part of the secondary apartment.
haydee schrieb:
Living unit too small, not up to date. My weekends always feel too short, too 🙄 :p
Similar topics