ᐅ Location of a city villa or detached single-family house on a 500 m² rectangular plot
Created on: 17 Jan 2020 18:03
T
Tolentino
Dear all,
after sharing the floor plans of my possible hamster cage with you in the other thread , here comes the next thread (thanks again for all the constructive suggestions there).
Just so you know, the semi-detached house is not off the table yet, as this plot of land is highly sought after and it’s not clear whether it will work out. But this one would be my favorite.
Now to this plot. For now, I’m mainly concerned with where and roughly how the house should be positioned on this plot.
Development plan / restrictions
Plot size: 500 m² (5400 sq ft)
Slope: none
Site coverage ratio: 0.2
Floor area ratio: 0.4
Building envelope, building line and boundary: 5 m (16 ft) from the street, 3 m (10 ft) from neighbors
Edge development: allowed for garages and sheds, none existing on the plot
Number of parking spaces: 1-2
Number of floors: 1.5–2.5
Roof shape: no preference
Architectural style: no preference
Orientation: aligned parallel to the street
Maximum heights / limits: ridge height max. 9 m (30 ft)
Below are the site plans I created myself based on the details from the listing.
This is a rough overview of the plot with building boundaries and dimensions.

My question is: where to put the house?
The broker suggests placing it towards the back, since you already have the 5 m (16 ft) setback at the front and would “gain” about 3 m (10 ft) of garden. My partner doesn’t like this because of the visibility from the street. I say: privacy screen! But I also think, a fence too high might create a prison-yard feel.
But even if you follow this suggestion, I wonder if a more square floor plan (-> town villa style) would be better?
Like this, for example:

Then parking space might be tricky, right?
Or upright like this?

I really want as much of a west-facing view and garden as possible. I tend to be an evening person and that side is less built up, due to the road. So I think more light comes through.
But the narrow floor plan caused lots of problems with the semi-detached house already. Well, here you could build longer instead.
What do you think?
Best regards
Tolentino
after sharing the floor plans of my possible hamster cage with you in the other thread , here comes the next thread (thanks again for all the constructive suggestions there).
Just so you know, the semi-detached house is not off the table yet, as this plot of land is highly sought after and it’s not clear whether it will work out. But this one would be my favorite.
Now to this plot. For now, I’m mainly concerned with where and roughly how the house should be positioned on this plot.
Development plan / restrictions
Plot size: 500 m² (5400 sq ft)
Slope: none
Site coverage ratio: 0.2
Floor area ratio: 0.4
Building envelope, building line and boundary: 5 m (16 ft) from the street, 3 m (10 ft) from neighbors
Edge development: allowed for garages and sheds, none existing on the plot
Number of parking spaces: 1-2
Number of floors: 1.5–2.5
Roof shape: no preference
Architectural style: no preference
Orientation: aligned parallel to the street
Maximum heights / limits: ridge height max. 9 m (30 ft)
Below are the site plans I created myself based on the details from the listing.
This is a rough overview of the plot with building boundaries and dimensions.
My question is: where to put the house?
The broker suggests placing it towards the back, since you already have the 5 m (16 ft) setback at the front and would “gain” about 3 m (10 ft) of garden. My partner doesn’t like this because of the visibility from the street. I say: privacy screen! But I also think, a fence too high might create a prison-yard feel.
But even if you follow this suggestion, I wonder if a more square floor plan (-> town villa style) would be better?
Like this, for example:
Then parking space might be tricky, right?
Or upright like this?
I really want as much of a west-facing view and garden as possible. I tend to be an evening person and that side is less built up, due to the road. So I think more light comes through.
But the narrow floor plan caused lots of problems with the semi-detached house already. Well, here you could build longer instead.
What do you think?
Best regards
Tolentino
Tolentino schrieb:
I’m going to call anyway; the caseworker on the phone doesn’t exactly share the news hot off the press that the peculiar Tolentino doesn’t trust his site manager. And you’re right in that I shouldn’t let a phone call discourage me from a project costing over half a million. So, I called and explained my concerns. The reply was roughly as stated above. The pattern of neighboring buildings must be maintained, and the neighbors’ properties all face the street where their parcels are located.
If I can’t park there, I’ll have to put the parking space somewhere else. The neighbors apparently have theirs in front of or next to their houses anyway.
This whole thing isn’t worth going to court over.
Tolentino schrieb:
Does anyone have any input on the shafts (#122 and following)?
Can the house simply be built over them with pipes going in, under, or past them (in the case of the well)?
Or do they need to be demolished and filled in? They’re concrete, about 1.5m (5 feet) deep each. Really no one?
Best (Easter) regards
Tolentino
Hello again,
I wanted to share the floor plans here for your consideration.
Variant 4 is essentially based on the version from @kaho674, but adjusted to fit the furniture layout we are planning.
Variant 3 is my attempt to place the entrance on the parking side.
I think both options have their pros and cons.
I have also uploaded the preliminary site plan from the surveyor again.
Key questions have been answered in post #79.
Thank you very much for your contributions...
Best regards
Tolentino





I wanted to share the floor plans here for your consideration.
Variant 4 is essentially based on the version from @kaho674, but adjusted to fit the furniture layout we are planning.
Variant 3 is my attempt to place the entrance on the parking side.
I think both options have their pros and cons.
I have also uploaded the preliminary site plan from the surveyor again.
Key questions have been answered in post #79.
Thank you very much for your contributions...
Best regards
Tolentino
Regarding option 4 kuckmada: https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/efh-Flachdach-waldrandlage-175-qm.30201/page-15#post-390926 – recently, @kbt09 illustrated the issue of headroom problems with stair landings that are partially built over.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Tolentino schrieb:
If I can’t park there, I’ll just put the parking space somewhere else. The neighbors do the same, either in front of or next to their houses.
Huh? I thought parking in front of the house was prohibited, forbidden, illegal, against regulations, off-limits, not allowed, irregular, unwanted, etc.? Could it be possible after all?
11ant schrieb:
illustrating the head clearance issue at built-over stair landings.I can’t speak for the original poster’s designs. But I did calculate it, of course. (I’m a bit disappointed now—what do you think of me? ) The ceiling height / story height is assumed to be 2.60m / 2.90m (8 ft 6 in / 9 ft 6 in) and the head clearance is over 2.10m (6 ft 11 in).What I don’t quite understand: You insisted on having 3 children’s rooms, but now you’re building only 2 that can be separated later?
If that’s what you want, it would be much more elegant to evenly divide the children’s rooms right from the start and add two walls later on. Disturbing windows could be split into two smaller ones instead of one large window. You just have to be careful how you install the electrical wiring and heating.
However, I think putting a closet in the upstairs hallway is nonsense. It’s already too tight there. All other changes don’t work for me either (obviously— ). Above all, the living room door has to open into the living room to avoid immediate door chaos. The coat rack can partly be placed under the stairs, etc.
I don’t like the entrance from the side at all—but maybe there are other solutions for that.
@kaho674 … this concerns the encroachment of the lower stair steps in the ground floor, which becomes necessary on the upper floor to access the master bedroom.
For people taller than 180 cm (5 ft 11 in), going downstairs there is uncomfortable. Therefore, especially with floor-to-floor heights up to 295 cm (9 ft 8 in), which usually corresponds to a clear ceiling height of around 260 cm (8 ft 6 in), it might be better not to include this already in the initial design sketches. From experience, more encroachment is usually required during detailed planning.
For people taller than 180 cm (5 ft 11 in), going downstairs there is uncomfortable. Therefore, especially with floor-to-floor heights up to 295 cm (9 ft 8 in), which usually corresponds to a clear ceiling height of around 260 cm (8 ft 6 in), it might be better not to include this already in the initial design sketches. From experience, more encroachment is usually required during detailed planning.
kbt09 schrieb:
@kaho674 ... this is about building over the lower steps on the ground floor, which is necessary in the upper floor to access the master bedroom.I understand. The plan would need detailed calculations anyway. In my sketch, I calculated 2.14m (7 feet) whereas you have 2.02m (6 feet 7.5 inches). I find that acceptable. If that is not enough, the house will just have to be made deeper. This probably involves only a few centimeters (inches).
Similar topics