Hello fellow building enthusiasts,
We recently purchased two plots of land where a small new residential area (11 single-family homes) is being developed. We are planning to build a townhouse with a living space of about 160 sqm (1,722 sq ft).
You might be wondering why two plots... One parcel was too small for a detached single-family home, so we bought two because we wanted a bit more space in the garden.
One parcel measures 305 sqm (3,284 sq ft) and the other 267 sqm (2,875 sq ft). Together we have 572 sqm (6,159 sq ft) (parcels 1654 and 1656). Including access paths, the total area is 622 sqm (6,695 sq ft). The plots are approximately 19 meters (62 feet) deep and 30 meters (98 feet) wide.
Now to our questions:
How can we position the house most advantageously on the plots?
The driveway access to the houses is planned from the Southwest street (plot 1652). The street there is 4.5 meters (15 feet) wide. On the Northeast side, a 2-meter (6.5 feet) wide pedestrian walkway is planned.
The blue line in the drawing marks the building boundary. There is no need to maintain a 3-meter (10 feet) setback from the pedestrian walkway; 1.5 to 2 meters (5 to 6.5 feet) are sufficient here. I think the most favorable placement would be to position the house in the Northeast corner with the main entrance facing the pedestrian walkway, so we could have the entire garden on the Southwest side.
How can the garage be positioned conveniently in this layout?
I think the garage would make most sense placed along the boundary of the neighboring plot 1653.
I have sketched four different options that we have considered.
Option 1:
If we place the garage directly attached to the house, we would have to enter the house through the back door of the garage every time, and there would only be space for one parking spot in front of the garage, which is not ideal for two cars.
Option 2:
A garage positioned with some distance from the house. This would allow space for a second parking spot. However, with this option, we would need to fence off the garden area near the parking spots to prevent direct views into the garden. We would also be losing a lot of usable space and would have to pave the path leading to the front and the area in front of the house and garage.
Option 3:
Similar to option 2, but with the fencing arranged differently. The garden area next to the garage could still be used as garden space, but we would have to go through the garden gate every time from the garage to reach the house entrance.
In all three options, the pathways to the house entrance are quite long.
Additionally, I have never seen a garage positioned with its back wall facing the side of the house entrance. Usually, the garage door faces the side of the house entrance, or the house entrance is placed on the side adjacent to the garage.
Option 4:
The option we like best is access to the garage via the pedestrian walkway. The walkway was originally planned as a footpath and will be paved 2 meters (6.5 feet) wide during site development. We could widen it by about 1 meter (3 feet), making it a 3-meter (10 feet) wide driveway/walkway that could be used to drive into the garage. We would need to pave that additional meter ourselves and shift the house one meter (3 feet) further, which would not be a problem given the size of the plot. According to the development plan and information from the city, this would be perfectly allowed. We have pedestrian, vehicle access, and utility easements benefiting the residents for this walkway. With this option, we could place the garage directly attached to the house and use the second parking spot in front of the utility room window.
Options 1 to 3 might be possible if the house entrance is placed on the garage side, but then I’m not sure how we would need to change the floor plan.
How would you position the house and garage? Maybe you can help us with some new ideas to move forward.
We recently purchased two plots of land where a small new residential area (11 single-family homes) is being developed. We are planning to build a townhouse with a living space of about 160 sqm (1,722 sq ft).
You might be wondering why two plots... One parcel was too small for a detached single-family home, so we bought two because we wanted a bit more space in the garden.
One parcel measures 305 sqm (3,284 sq ft) and the other 267 sqm (2,875 sq ft). Together we have 572 sqm (6,159 sq ft) (parcels 1654 and 1656). Including access paths, the total area is 622 sqm (6,695 sq ft). The plots are approximately 19 meters (62 feet) deep and 30 meters (98 feet) wide.
Now to our questions:
How can we position the house most advantageously on the plots?
The driveway access to the houses is planned from the Southwest street (plot 1652). The street there is 4.5 meters (15 feet) wide. On the Northeast side, a 2-meter (6.5 feet) wide pedestrian walkway is planned.
The blue line in the drawing marks the building boundary. There is no need to maintain a 3-meter (10 feet) setback from the pedestrian walkway; 1.5 to 2 meters (5 to 6.5 feet) are sufficient here. I think the most favorable placement would be to position the house in the Northeast corner with the main entrance facing the pedestrian walkway, so we could have the entire garden on the Southwest side.
How can the garage be positioned conveniently in this layout?
I think the garage would make most sense placed along the boundary of the neighboring plot 1653.
I have sketched four different options that we have considered.
Option 1:
If we place the garage directly attached to the house, we would have to enter the house through the back door of the garage every time, and there would only be space for one parking spot in front of the garage, which is not ideal for two cars.
Option 2:
A garage positioned with some distance from the house. This would allow space for a second parking spot. However, with this option, we would need to fence off the garden area near the parking spots to prevent direct views into the garden. We would also be losing a lot of usable space and would have to pave the path leading to the front and the area in front of the house and garage.
Option 3:
Similar to option 2, but with the fencing arranged differently. The garden area next to the garage could still be used as garden space, but we would have to go through the garden gate every time from the garage to reach the house entrance.
In all three options, the pathways to the house entrance are quite long.
Additionally, I have never seen a garage positioned with its back wall facing the side of the house entrance. Usually, the garage door faces the side of the house entrance, or the house entrance is placed on the side adjacent to the garage.
Option 4:
The option we like best is access to the garage via the pedestrian walkway. The walkway was originally planned as a footpath and will be paved 2 meters (6.5 feet) wide during site development. We could widen it by about 1 meter (3 feet), making it a 3-meter (10 feet) wide driveway/walkway that could be used to drive into the garage. We would need to pave that additional meter ourselves and shift the house one meter (3 feet) further, which would not be a problem given the size of the plot. According to the development plan and information from the city, this would be perfectly allowed. We have pedestrian, vehicle access, and utility easements benefiting the residents for this walkway. With this option, we could place the garage directly attached to the house and use the second parking spot in front of the utility room window.
Options 1 to 3 might be possible if the house entrance is placed on the garage side, but then I’m not sure how we would need to change the floor plan.
How would you position the house and garage? Maybe you can help us with some new ideas to move forward.
kaho674 schrieb:
If the sidewalk belonged to you, it would be part of your property. As far as I know, it does not; it belongs to public space. It is a misconception to think you own something just because you may be the only one using it.
Or do you actually have an entry for this parcel in the land registry?The private walkway in front of our property belongs to parcels 1654 and 1656. The walkway in front of the neighbor’s house belongs to parcel 1653. If you calculate the square meters of the individual parcels, the total value only matches when the walkway is included.
The plotted house width is 8.5m (28 feet) plus 3 meters (10 feet) minimum distance on both sides, making 14.5m (48 feet) total. The depth from the end of the walkway is 19m (62 feet). 19 x 14.5 = 275.5 square meters (2,967 square feet). With the 2 meters (6.5 feet) walkway added, it becomes 21 x 14.5 = 304.5 square meters (3,279 square feet) (parcel 1654). The same calculation applies for parcels 1656 and 1653. In the drawing, there is no parcel number assigned to the walkway.
Only the private roads are proportionally owned by all parties. We own 2/6 shares of the private road (parcel 1652). This is also stated in the property purchase agreement.
All right, so it’s actually your sidewalk. That you probably have to build by law? Or can you leave it out and plant bushes instead? Strange situation.
If you create a driveway there now, your property will become even narrower, right? Do you already know the neighbor to ask what they think about it?
If you create a driveway there now, your property will become even narrower, right? Do you already know the neighbor to ask what they think about it?
Bieber0815 schrieb:
What is the issue with the suggested layout there? It looks reasonable and would give you a garden with a wonderful southern orientation (at the bottom of the plan, or southwest if you prefer).
If you position the house like that, you could divide the property in 25 years and a child could build a second house. At least it’s an option. Who knows what the future holds…We also like the orientation and the way the houses are positioned. We will probably place the house like that. The bigger problem (relatively speaking) is the placement of the garage. If we place the garage as shown in the drawing, directly attached to the house, we would only have one parking space and would have to go through the garage every time to reach the front entrance.
If we keep the garage attached to the house and add a second parking space, we would need to enlarge the area, and then the parking space would be right next to our terrace. Naturally, we wouldn’t find that very appealing.
Another option would be to position the garage with some distance from the house. That way, we would have two parking spaces, but we would still have to walk alongside the house to get to the front entrance. If we put a fence there, we would have to leave the garage, go through the first garden gate, and only then reach the front entrance.
Therefore, we find the nicer option would be to have the driveway directly on the side of the footpath. This would shorten the walk to the front entrance, allow us to fence off the house from the end of the garage, and make the entire area behind the garage usable as garden space. Another advantage would be that if the garage is very long, the parking spot inside would be immediately next to the terrace, allowing quick access.
Sure, we could place the front door on the side, but that would require changing the floor plan and layout, which would also affect the orientation of the rooms negatively.
Well, as I said, we are currently leaning towards having the driveway access from the footpath side.
Dividing the property in 25 years would certainly be an option for the future.
kaho674 schrieb:
Alright, so it’s actually your sidewalk. Which you probably have to build by law? Or can you skip it and plant shrubs instead? That’s a strange situation.
If you build a driveway there now, your lot will get even narrower, right? Do you already know the neighbor to ask for their opinion?I believe we are required to build the sidewalk as it’s specified in the development plan. I hadn’t clarified that point before. However, whether we extend it by 1 meter or not is up to us. The city and the land seller both confirmed this to us over the phone. The land seller is also responsible for arranging the site development and will have the sidewalk (the 2 meters) paved.
According to the plan, the 2-meter (6.5 feet) sidewalk plus the 1.5-meter (5 feet) front yard add up to 3.5 meters (11.5 feet) up to the next garden boundary. If we made the sidewalk 1 meter (3 feet) wider, we would obviously lose 1 meter (3 feet) in depth on our lot, and we are aware of that. But according to our calculations, there would still be enough space to place the house and a terrace with a good distance to the fence.
From the end of the sidewalk, there are 19 meters (62 feet) in depth.
19 meters (62 feet) - 1 meter (3 feet) extra = 18 meters (59 feet) - 1.5 meters (5 feet) front yard = 16.5 meters (54 feet).
If we build our house about 9.5 meters (31 feet) deep, that leaves 7 meters (23 feet) - 3 to 4 meters (10 to 13 feet) for the terrace = 3 to 4 meters (10 to 13 feet) left from the end of the terrace to the fence. You don’t actually sit at the very edge of the terrace but rather in the middle, so the distance from the terrace to the fence would be 4 to 6 meters (13 to 20 feet), which we find more than sufficient. Additionally, this leaves the entire side of the lot free for a pool in summer, a play area for the children (sandbox, swing, etc.).
I think you’ve gotten completely stuck on the floor plan. This is a standard, off-the-shelf house design you found. Normally, nobody buys a house like that! Everyone designs their house individually. And if the entrance has to be on the side, that’s absolutely no problem—you can still have the living areas facing south/garden, etc.
I also think the idea of an optional second house for the children is very good.
I also think the idea of an optional second house for the children is very good.
kaho674 schrieb:
I think you are getting too stuck on the floor plan. The house you found is a standard model. Usually, no one buys a ready-made design! Everyone plans their house individually. And if the entrance needs to be on the side, that’s no problem at all—you can still have the living spaces facing south/garden, etc.
I also think the suggestion of an optional second house for the children is very good.That might be true. We find it hard to imagine other options. We have looked at countless floor plans in catalogs and online. Somehow, a floor plan like this one appeals to us the most. Of course, we might adjust a few things here and there, but I honestly don’t see what could be made significantly better or more beautiful. For example, we wanted a large open living-dining area with the kitchen slightly separated around the corner. There isn’t much space left on the ground floor to make other changes. We need to find places for the staircase, utility room, and guest toilet. There just isn’t much more room.
Also, I find an entrance like this one very appealing, with a small porch. (Photo attached) If I place the entrance on the side, the garage would be just 2–3 meters (7–10 feet) in front of it… and that would ruin the nice view of the “impressive” entrance because the garage is directly in front. And if we were to plan the garage driveway at the back and the entrance from the sidewalk… I have never seen a house where the garage is oriented away from the main entrance. I just can’t imagine such a layout. Everyone places their garage with the driveway facing the entrance, either on the side or front, but never the other way around.
Maybe we just lack the imagination to see how it could look finished, but as far as we are concerned, we like the entrance facing front and the driveway in front best.
Regarding the building sections, we will definitely discuss these further with our house planner and later with the architect. At first, we should pick 2 or 3 cross-sections that we like.
Similar topics