ᐅ Floor plans for a single-family house, approximately 1,500 sq ft (140 m²), without a basement
Created on: 1 Nov 2016 14:14
S
stefanvery
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 439 sqm (4720 sq ft)
Slope: yes, approx. 1.3 m (4 ft) descent across the plot, approx. 0.5 m (1.6 ft) in the house area
Site occupancy index (floor space ratio): 0.35
Floor area ratio (FAR): 0.6
Building window, building line and boundary: see development plan
Border development:
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of storeys: 2
Roof style: any
Architectural style: any
Orientation: southeast or southwest
Maximum height / limits: 10 m (33 ft) above street curb level
Further requirements
Homeowners’ Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: gable roof
Basement, floors: 1.5 floors without basement, approx. 1.25 m (4 ft) knee wall height
Number of occupants, age: 2 adults (32 years + 27 years), children planned
Space requirement on ground floor and upper floor: approx. 130 sqm (1400 sq ft)
Office: family use and home office
Guest sleeping per year: rare
Open or closed layout: closed
Traditional or modern design: mixed
Open kitchen, kitchen island: semi-open to dining room
Number of dining seats: 6
Fireplace: no
Heating: bio-district heating, no own heat generator in the house
Music / stereo wall: yes
Balcony, roof terrace: terraces to southeast and southwest
Garage, carport: 2 carports, 2 parking spaces in front of carport
Utility garden, greenhouse: yes
Other wishes / special features / daily routine: controlled residential ventilation, monolithic wall made of brick or aerated concrete. Due to the lack of a basement, the office and utility room must be located on the ground floor.
Owner’s work: flooring, painting, and installation of controlled residential ventilation
House Design
Who designed it: by us
What do you particularly like?
What do you dislike?
- We don’t find the entrance behind the carport ideal. However, with the rather small plot, there is hardly any alternative. An entrance facing south is not very good, as we want to use the south side for other rooms. If we put the carport completely behind or next to the house, the house moves too much towards the center of the plot, leaving hardly any meaningful garden space in any direction. Suggestions are very welcome here.
- When entering the bathroom, the first thing you see is the shower wall.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: depending on provider, 190,000 to 250,000, including special features, excluding ancillary building costs and materials for owner’s work
Personal budget limit for the house, including fittings: 210,000, including special features, excluding ancillary building costs and materials for owner’s work
Preferred heating technology: district heating available and mandatory
If you had to give up something, which details or extensions?
- Can you do without: actually nothing unnecessary planned
- Cannot do without: n/a
The exterior dimensions (10.24 m x 9.24 m / 33 ft 7 in x 30 ft 4 in) come from a Flair 134 – this provider has so far been by far the most affordable. The dimensions also fit our plot very well. After many other floor plans with different dimensions, we ultimately chose this one.
Basically, we are very satisfied with it; everything seems to be exactly the size we need. Nothing is too big, nothing too small. Of course, bigger would always be nicer.
Our only points of criticism are:
- the shower wall right in front when entering the bathroom
- the house entrance behind the carport. As a passage between the cars, about 1.40 m (4.6 ft) clearance is planned. Beyond that, there is a passage between the house wall and the shed, about 1.70 m (5.6 ft) wide.
What is your opinion on the overall floor plan and these two points of criticism?
Plot size: 439 sqm (4720 sq ft)
Slope: yes, approx. 1.3 m (4 ft) descent across the plot, approx. 0.5 m (1.6 ft) in the house area
Site occupancy index (floor space ratio): 0.35
Floor area ratio (FAR): 0.6
Building window, building line and boundary: see development plan
Border development:
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of storeys: 2
Roof style: any
Architectural style: any
Orientation: southeast or southwest
Maximum height / limits: 10 m (33 ft) above street curb level
Further requirements
Homeowners’ Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: gable roof
Basement, floors: 1.5 floors without basement, approx. 1.25 m (4 ft) knee wall height
Number of occupants, age: 2 adults (32 years + 27 years), children planned
Space requirement on ground floor and upper floor: approx. 130 sqm (1400 sq ft)
Office: family use and home office
Guest sleeping per year: rare
Open or closed layout: closed
Traditional or modern design: mixed
Open kitchen, kitchen island: semi-open to dining room
Number of dining seats: 6
Fireplace: no
Heating: bio-district heating, no own heat generator in the house
Music / stereo wall: yes
Balcony, roof terrace: terraces to southeast and southwest
Garage, carport: 2 carports, 2 parking spaces in front of carport
Utility garden, greenhouse: yes
Other wishes / special features / daily routine: controlled residential ventilation, monolithic wall made of brick or aerated concrete. Due to the lack of a basement, the office and utility room must be located on the ground floor.
Owner’s work: flooring, painting, and installation of controlled residential ventilation
House Design
Who designed it: by us
What do you particularly like?
What do you dislike?
- We don’t find the entrance behind the carport ideal. However, with the rather small plot, there is hardly any alternative. An entrance facing south is not very good, as we want to use the south side for other rooms. If we put the carport completely behind or next to the house, the house moves too much towards the center of the plot, leaving hardly any meaningful garden space in any direction. Suggestions are very welcome here.
- When entering the bathroom, the first thing you see is the shower wall.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: depending on provider, 190,000 to 250,000, including special features, excluding ancillary building costs and materials for owner’s work
Personal budget limit for the house, including fittings: 210,000, including special features, excluding ancillary building costs and materials for owner’s work
Preferred heating technology: district heating available and mandatory
If you had to give up something, which details or extensions?
- Can you do without: actually nothing unnecessary planned
- Cannot do without: n/a
The exterior dimensions (10.24 m x 9.24 m / 33 ft 7 in x 30 ft 4 in) come from a Flair 134 – this provider has so far been by far the most affordable. The dimensions also fit our plot very well. After many other floor plans with different dimensions, we ultimately chose this one.
Basically, we are very satisfied with it; everything seems to be exactly the size we need. Nothing is too big, nothing too small. Of course, bigger would always be nicer.
Our only points of criticism are:
- the shower wall right in front when entering the bathroom
- the house entrance behind the carport. As a passage between the cars, about 1.40 m (4.6 ft) clearance is planned. Beyond that, there is a passage between the house wall and the shed, about 1.70 m (5.6 ft) wide.
What is your opinion on the overall floor plan and these two points of criticism?
S
stefanvery2 Nov 2016 11:17ypg schrieb:
On the other hand, I would be interested in the age or generation of the family council who think that floor-to-ceiling windows take up usable space. My parents thought floor-to-ceiling windows would look nice. We ourselves find non-floor-to-ceiling windows much more practical.
ypg schrieb:
I tend to go for a maximum house width of 7.5 meters. But that’s not available in an affordable standard design. It doesn’t have to be an affordable “standard” design, we have also contacted companies for custom plans. However, I wouldn’t be so keen on 7.5m width with 12m depth, because that would make the gable quite tall. Fortunately, we are allowed to rotate the house exactly 90°. That would solve the gable issue, but I still think a more balanced ratio of width to depth looks better.
ypg schrieb:
So either mirror everything along the diagonal, resulting in the driveway coming from the west, or have the carport in front near the street so you have to turn 90 degrees left from the driveway into the carport. We hadn’t thought about rotating the carport by 90°. Whether we like it or not—time will tell—I would say it’s just as imperfect as the other options.
I roughly sketched out the different options on paper again. Did I interpret your two proposals correctly?
For the versions with the carport next to the house, we don’t like the long driveway either, especially since we are only allowed very limited building coverage.
For the carport at the top (northwest), I wonder if that works well with the sloping terrain. We would want to place the carport right at the boundary line up there. So, at that point, we’re about 1.40m (1.5 yards) higher than at the southeastern boundary. Since the ground level at the boundary cannot be altered—not even by supporting structures—the carport would have to be at least around +1.20m (4 feet) in height. In my opinion, the adjacent house would need to be at the same height, also +1.20m (4 feet). Then, without a basement, it would stand high above the plot.
If the carport is placed down at the southeast, it might be somewhat lower than the house, which seems better to me than the other way around.
ypg schrieb:
Regarding the upper floor: Plan for both children’s rooms facing west, each around 15 m² (160 ft²). That could free up space for a decent storage room.
Downstairs, the utility room and the office should also be accommodated in appropriate sizes.
That isn’t the original floor plan, is it? No, the floor plan was drawn completely freehand. At some point, we realized that we could fit the result within the standard external dimensions of the Flair design. To compare prices more easily, we initially focused all our inquiries on these external dimensions.
Of course, I would like a more balanced distribution of room sizes too. We already tried several other floor plan variations. But something was always off, for example, the entrance area would be too narrow inside the house, etc. We’ll have to think it over again.
Thanks for your feedback! (Even though it unfortunately confirms my doubts.)
stefanvery schrieb:
whether this works well because of the slope Now a silly question again: what is the gradient you have? Because in the photo in the second post here, there is no sign of a "slope" at all.
At least not to me.
S
stefanvery2 Nov 2016 12:08Yes, it is quite misleading, especially in the photo, but also when you stand in front of it. We had previously reserved another plot where the slope didn’t seem very steep at first either. Then we measured, and it was 1.80m (5 feet 11 inches).
The slope in the development area runs overall from northwest to southeast, exactly in line with the house orientation. According to the contour lines on the site plan (also visible in the attached excerpt), it is about 1.50m (4 feet 11 inches) from northwest to southeast. The local authority moved a lot of soil during road construction; I think now the slope might only be about 1m (3 feet 3 inches). We will have to measure again. But it is definitely more than it initially appears.
The slope in the development area runs overall from northwest to southeast, exactly in line with the house orientation. According to the contour lines on the site plan (also visible in the attached excerpt), it is about 1.50m (4 feet 11 inches) from northwest to southeast. The local authority moved a lot of soil during road construction; I think now the slope might only be about 1m (3 feet 3 inches). We will have to measure again. But it is definitely more than it initially appears.
stefanvery schrieb:
According to the contour lines on the zoning plan (this can also be seen in the attached excerpt) On which excerpt is this supposed to be visible? I’m at a loss.
S
stefanvery2 Nov 2016 12:25RobsonMKK schrieb:
Where exactly should this be visible? I’m confused. The dashed lines on the site plan.jpg indicate elevation changes in 0.5 m (1.6 ft) increments.
Similar topics