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
Oh yes, that wasn’t made clear enough, although it is mentioned somewhere above.
The contract includes 30cm (12 inches) of soil replacement, meaning that if it had only been a very thin topsoil layer and then load-bearing soil underneath, I wouldn’t have had to pay anything extra.
The soil report (which the project manager commissioned as part of the inclusive services, and which was therefore also available to their subcontractor, the excavation contractor) recommended 70cm (28 inches), and for the additional 40cm (approximately 56 cubic meters / 90 metric tons) there was then a change order offer. But the report was based on boreholes at only two locations.
The excavation contractor then found during the removal of the non-load-bearing soil that this layer was unevenly deeper across the building site. Since you can’t (or usually don’t) excavate at an angle, they had to remove soil deeper across the entire site—ultimately 1m (39 inches), which for me meant 70cm (28 inches) instead of 40cm (16 inches).
In the end, a total of 120cm (47 inches) of material was removed—90cm (35 inches) for me—because the subgrade had to be raised above the original ground level to comply with the building permit / planning permission.
Apparently, about 20cm (8 inches) of topsoil was already removed along with the vegetation during demolition, which nobody seemed to notice.
The contract includes 30cm (12 inches) of soil replacement, meaning that if it had only been a very thin topsoil layer and then load-bearing soil underneath, I wouldn’t have had to pay anything extra.
The soil report (which the project manager commissioned as part of the inclusive services, and which was therefore also available to their subcontractor, the excavation contractor) recommended 70cm (28 inches), and for the additional 40cm (approximately 56 cubic meters / 90 metric tons) there was then a change order offer. But the report was based on boreholes at only two locations.
The excavation contractor then found during the removal of the non-load-bearing soil that this layer was unevenly deeper across the building site. Since you can’t (or usually don’t) excavate at an angle, they had to remove soil deeper across the entire site—ultimately 1m (39 inches), which for me meant 70cm (28 inches) instead of 40cm (16 inches).
In the end, a total of 120cm (47 inches) of material was removed—90cm (35 inches) for me—because the subgrade had to be raised above the original ground level to comply with the building permit / planning permission.
Apparently, about 20cm (8 inches) of topsoil was already removed along with the vegetation during demolition, which nobody seemed to notice.
Oh, I see @icandoit. After the explanation, everything seems reasonable and the photos make it clear. I just wanted to understand why, as I hadn’t noticed on my own that the base layer actually protrudes above the surrounding ground level, which means more material was brought in than excavated.
I was just bothered by the way the communication was handled.
The fact that the civil engineer contacted me directly is due to the situation that I am already obtaining quotes for further work (now truly on the client side), and the general contractor provided the contact.
Their technical work was done well (confirmed by my expert).
I was just bothered by the way the communication was handled.
The fact that the civil engineer contacted me directly is due to the situation that I am already obtaining quotes for further work (now truly on the client side), and the general contractor provided the contact.
Their technical work was done well (confirmed by my expert).
So, unfortunately, I have some negative news. I tried to apply for the water connection without a meter chamber. I just got a call from the application officer, whom I have been in contact with beforehand.
He insists on the standard contract terms of the BWB stating that for pipe lengths over 15m (50 feet) on private property, a meter chamber must be installed.
Apparently, Berlin is divided into different piping networks, and just because they accepted a pipe length well over 15m (50 feet) directly into the utility room at @Nida35, it doesn’t mean they will do the same for me.
Even though the pipe up to the meter is my property, BWB is apparently responsible for maintenance, even if I installed it myself. And there is apparently so much trouble if they ever have to replace a pipe later (settling issues, who knows what) that they no longer want to take on that responsibility.
Well, now I have to figure out what is the most cost-effective solution. A large chamber for both connections in the driveway, or two smaller ones—one for the rear property in the driveway (drive-over type) and another somewhere at the boundary for me.
As for the house construction, they are still working on the neighbor’s ground floor. You just can’t build quickly with cold fingers.
He insists on the standard contract terms of the BWB stating that for pipe lengths over 15m (50 feet) on private property, a meter chamber must be installed.
Apparently, Berlin is divided into different piping networks, and just because they accepted a pipe length well over 15m (50 feet) directly into the utility room at @Nida35, it doesn’t mean they will do the same for me.
Even though the pipe up to the meter is my property, BWB is apparently responsible for maintenance, even if I installed it myself. And there is apparently so much trouble if they ever have to replace a pipe later (settling issues, who knows what) that they no longer want to take on that responsibility.
Well, now I have to figure out what is the most cost-effective solution. A large chamber for both connections in the driveway, or two smaller ones—one for the rear property in the driveway (drive-over type) and another somewhere at the boundary for me.
As for the house construction, they are still working on the neighbor’s ground floor. You just can’t build quickly with cold fingers.
Yes, it’s quite frustrating overall. On another note, I have finally decided on an HVAC contractor—I hope I’ve made the right choice. He always made a very good impression during our conversations, and his offer (https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/kosten-fuer-das-gewerk-heizung-sanitaer.37037/post-457559) was comprehensive and fairly transparent. After all, he will be a future neighbor (about 800m (875 yards) away), so hopefully that’s a good sign.
Similar topics