ᐅ House and Floor Plan Design – Initial Architect’s Draft Available
Created on: 14 Oct 2020 18:29
P
Pinkiponk
As previously announced, our old house in Baden-Württemberg has now been sold, we have moved to the Leipzig district, and we can now focus on our new house. Due to our age, we have deliberately downsized both the lot size and the living space. We have a first architect’s draft. I have already noted a few change requests and am now looking forward to your additions, criticism, and suggestions. If further plans or similar are needed, I will gladly provide them as long as I have them available.
Thank you in advance for taking the time to help me.
Development Plan / Restrictions
Lot size: 567sqm (6,105 sqft)
Slope: visually not noticeable; if this is important information, I will look for where to find it
Site occupancy index: 0.35
Floor area ratio: 0.8
Building envelope, building line, and boundary: see attached drawing
Edge development: not allowed/desired on our part
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of floors: 2
Roof type: hipped roof
Style: classic, conservative
Orientation: ?
Maximum heights/limits: “Top of raw floor slab of ground floor to ridge height of main roof max. 11.5 meters (38 feet)”; “Top of raw floor slab of ground floor to eave height of main roof max. 7.0 meters (23 feet)”
Further requirements
Client Requirements
Style, roof shape, building type: we are trying to approximate the house shown in the photo below; however, without the gable projection; classic/conservative, hipped roof, town house
Basement, floors: no basement, 2 floors
Number of occupants, age: 1 male, 64 years old – 1 female, 58 years old
Space requirements on ground floor and upper floor:
Ground floor → kitchen, shower bathroom, living/lounge room, utility room with kitchenette and floor drain, hallway;
Upper floor → bathroom with tub, bedroom, 2 “wardrobe and storage rooms”
Office: family use or home office? Couple without children, no home office
Number of overnight guests per year: 10
Open or closed architecture: open on the outside, closed on the inside
Conservative or modern construction: conservative
Open kitchen, cooking island: no, classical L-shaped kitchen or similar (the plan includes a cooking island that will not be built)
Number of dining seats: 2 in the kitchen, up to 6–8 in the living/lounge room
Fireplace: gas stove chimney
Music/stereo wall: no
Balcony, roof terrace: both no
Garage, carport: 2 arched carports
Vegetable garden, greenhouse: both no
Additional wishes/particulars/daily routine, also reasons why some things should or should not be
House Design
Who created the plan:
– Planner from a construction company: yes, in cooperation with the clients
– Architect: unclear
– Do-it-yourself: yes, in cooperation with the prefabricated house manufacturer’s planner
What do you especially like? Why? Many windows and patio doors, lots of natural light and fresh air
What do you not like? Why? The windows on the upper floor are too low in the plan, but this will be changed
Price estimate according to architect/planner: already commissioned offer/order €312,780.00 (without carport, outdoor facilities, additional construction costs, land, ...)
Personal price limit for the house including equipment: €400,000.00
Preferred heating system: gas condensing boiler plus solar thermal (according to legal requirements)
If you have to forgo something, which details/upgrades
– What you can give up: we are already giving up shutters, whirlpool
– What you cannot give up: many windows and patio doors, muntins in the windows and doors
Why is the design as it is? For example:
A mixture of many examples from various magazines…
What do you think makes it good or bad? It generally meets our wishes. On the ground floor, we want access to the garden from every room. We find symmetry more pleasing than asymmetry. Few different window and door formats. No horizontal (“lying”) windows. Each of us has a separate room for clothing and such, so that no wardrobes have to be placed in the bedroom. We do not want a separate dressing room.
What is the most important/fundamental question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
The roof seems somewhat steep to me. Is a 30-degree roof pitch for a house with a base of 9.40m x 9.40m (31 feet x 31 feet) too steep? The standard according to the provider is 22 degrees. That seemed too flat, or you can hardly see the roof.
The development plan was too large to upload; I will try again in a separate post in this thread.
Thank you in advance for taking the time to help me.
Development Plan / Restrictions
Lot size: 567sqm (6,105 sqft)
Slope: visually not noticeable; if this is important information, I will look for where to find it
Site occupancy index: 0.35
Floor area ratio: 0.8
Building envelope, building line, and boundary: see attached drawing
Edge development: not allowed/desired on our part
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of floors: 2
Roof type: hipped roof
Style: classic, conservative
Orientation: ?
Maximum heights/limits: “Top of raw floor slab of ground floor to ridge height of main roof max. 11.5 meters (38 feet)”; “Top of raw floor slab of ground floor to eave height of main roof max. 7.0 meters (23 feet)”
Further requirements
Client Requirements
Style, roof shape, building type: we are trying to approximate the house shown in the photo below; however, without the gable projection; classic/conservative, hipped roof, town house
Basement, floors: no basement, 2 floors
Number of occupants, age: 1 male, 64 years old – 1 female, 58 years old
Space requirements on ground floor and upper floor:
Ground floor → kitchen, shower bathroom, living/lounge room, utility room with kitchenette and floor drain, hallway;
Upper floor → bathroom with tub, bedroom, 2 “wardrobe and storage rooms”
Office: family use or home office? Couple without children, no home office
Number of overnight guests per year: 10
Open or closed architecture: open on the outside, closed on the inside
Conservative or modern construction: conservative
Open kitchen, cooking island: no, classical L-shaped kitchen or similar (the plan includes a cooking island that will not be built)
Number of dining seats: 2 in the kitchen, up to 6–8 in the living/lounge room
Fireplace: gas stove chimney
Music/stereo wall: no
Balcony, roof terrace: both no
Garage, carport: 2 arched carports
Vegetable garden, greenhouse: both no
Additional wishes/particulars/daily routine, also reasons why some things should or should not be
House Design
Who created the plan:
– Planner from a construction company: yes, in cooperation with the clients
– Architect: unclear
– Do-it-yourself: yes, in cooperation with the prefabricated house manufacturer’s planner
What do you especially like? Why? Many windows and patio doors, lots of natural light and fresh air
What do you not like? Why? The windows on the upper floor are too low in the plan, but this will be changed
Price estimate according to architect/planner: already commissioned offer/order €312,780.00 (without carport, outdoor facilities, additional construction costs, land, ...)
Personal price limit for the house including equipment: €400,000.00
Preferred heating system: gas condensing boiler plus solar thermal (according to legal requirements)
If you have to forgo something, which details/upgrades
– What you can give up: we are already giving up shutters, whirlpool
– What you cannot give up: many windows and patio doors, muntins in the windows and doors
Why is the design as it is? For example:
A mixture of many examples from various magazines…
What do you think makes it good or bad? It generally meets our wishes. On the ground floor, we want access to the garden from every room. We find symmetry more pleasing than asymmetry. Few different window and door formats. No horizontal (“lying”) windows. Each of us has a separate room for clothing and such, so that no wardrobes have to be placed in the bedroom. We do not want a separate dressing room.
What is the most important/fundamental question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
The roof seems somewhat steep to me. Is a 30-degree roof pitch for a house with a base of 9.40m x 9.40m (31 feet x 31 feet) too steep? The standard according to the provider is 22 degrees. That seemed too flat, or you can hardly see the roof.
The development plan was too large to upload; I will try again in a separate post in this thread.
P
Pinkiponk25 Mar 2021 18:34ypg schrieb:
In writing or by phone? 😉By phone. ;-) All the other neighbors also exceeded the build window, but they built 10-15 years ago. Probably a lot has changed since then. Well, we just have to make the best of it. 🙂Pinkiponk schrieb:
What I find unfortunate in this context is that building authorities don’t just make a quick phone call to explain what changes are needed. Instead, it immediately becomes complicated for a layperson like me, with deadlines, hearings, and so on.That’s what you have a qualified architect or designer for, someone who has undergone extensive training at a technical school or university on this subject. The authority’s staff are primarily there to check whether the submitted plans comply with regulations.P
Pinkiponk26 Mar 2021 14:28Escroda schrieb:
That’s what a licensed design professional is for, someone who has studied the subject extensively at a master craftsman level or university. The authority’s staff are basically just there to check whether the conveyed knowledge has been implemented according to the regulations. Yes, our requests were discussed by phone with a case officer from the building authority who gave the impression that everything was fine... but presumably, someone else is now authorized to make decisions. And as mentioned, almost all the neighbors have exceeded their building boundaries. For us, though, that’s not a big deal since we’re fine with just a “standard mainstream house.”
Pinkiponk schrieb:
Spoken on the phone with a caseworker at the building authority who gave the impression that it was okay like that... but now, presumably, someone else is authorized to make the decision.At building authorities, it is not uncommon for the head official and their deputy to be civil servants, but those working below them are often employees—who may be technically competent, yet their information is sometimes only advisory without legal binding (not only due to lack of written form but also due to lack of authorization to represent).https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
P
Pinkiponk26 Mar 2021 16:44Pinkiponk schrieb:
Yes, our requests were discussed by phone with a case officer at the building authority who gave the impression that everything was fine... but apparently, someone else is now in charge of the decision. And as mentioned, almost all neighbors have exceeded the building boundaries. For us, that’s not a big issue since a “standard mainstream house” is sufficient. Correction: A nice house, but within the usual building boundaries. 🙂
11ant schrieb:
At building departments, it’s common that the head official and their deputy are civil servants, but the staff working below them may be employees – they might be technically competent, but their information is possibly just an opinion without legal binding (not only due to lack of written form, but also due to lack of authorization to represent). That’s nonsense. This has absolutely nothing to do with civil servant status.
But phone inquiries are always unreliable anyway.