ᐅ Narrow Plot Maximum Potential Single-Family Home with Low Knee Walls
Created on: 27 Aug 2019 20:33
S
Subwkloofer
We would like to build a nice, small, somewhat traditional single-family home on the mentioned plot of land.
Due to the dimensions, the width will probably be limited to about 8.50 m (28 feet).
Since I do not have a measurement program, I can only make rough estimates.
The original idea was to build without a basement and still have a guest bathroom with a toilet and a small guest/workroom of around 10 sqm (108 sq ft) on the ground floor.
However, because of the limited width, we were advised against this, and now we are considering whether adding a basement would make more sense to avoid squeezing everything in.
The upper floor is planned to have the usual three bedrooms (possibly with a small dressing room) and a bathroom including a bathtub.
A real challenge at the moment is the knee wall height of 0.5 m (20 inches).
After inquiries at the building authority, it may be possible to submit a preliminary request regarding a two-story construction.
Maybe you have some good advice or suggestions about what makes the most sense regarding cost-effectiveness.
We are completely open regarding heating technology and ventilation systems.
Underfloor heating is fixed.
Unfortunately, we have not yet found the perfect floor plan. (Preferably, the living rooms would face south, and the kitchen and guest WC would be on the north side.)
Is our plan feasible with this plot? What should be especially considered when working with an architect or builder?
Development plan/restrictions
Plot size: 509 sqm (5,476 sq ft)
Building window, building line, and boundary: generally 3 m (10 feet)
Number of floors: 1.5 floors
Roof type: pitched roofs with 30–50° slope
Open building style
Ridge: parallel to the plot
Knee wall height: 0.5 m (20 inches) from the top of the finished floor to the top of the wall plate
Maximum eaves height: 4 m (13 feet)
Plinth height: 0.70 m (28 inches)
Client requirements
Brick facade is on the wish list.
Possibly a basement, 1.5 or 2 floors
Number of people planned: 2 adults, 2 children (1–3 years)
Space requirements on the ground floor: kitchen, guest WC including shower, dining room, living room, study (without basement + utility room)
Space requirements on the upper floor: bathroom with bathtub and three bedrooms (possibly dressing room)
Kitchen should be open, max. with a movable partition
Carport with tool shed
Due to the dimensions, the width will probably be limited to about 8.50 m (28 feet).
Since I do not have a measurement program, I can only make rough estimates.
The original idea was to build without a basement and still have a guest bathroom with a toilet and a small guest/workroom of around 10 sqm (108 sq ft) on the ground floor.
However, because of the limited width, we were advised against this, and now we are considering whether adding a basement would make more sense to avoid squeezing everything in.
The upper floor is planned to have the usual three bedrooms (possibly with a small dressing room) and a bathroom including a bathtub.
A real challenge at the moment is the knee wall height of 0.5 m (20 inches).
After inquiries at the building authority, it may be possible to submit a preliminary request regarding a two-story construction.
Maybe you have some good advice or suggestions about what makes the most sense regarding cost-effectiveness.
We are completely open regarding heating technology and ventilation systems.
Underfloor heating is fixed.
Unfortunately, we have not yet found the perfect floor plan. (Preferably, the living rooms would face south, and the kitchen and guest WC would be on the north side.)
Is our plan feasible with this plot? What should be especially considered when working with an architect or builder?
Development plan/restrictions
Plot size: 509 sqm (5,476 sq ft)
Building window, building line, and boundary: generally 3 m (10 feet)
Number of floors: 1.5 floors
Roof type: pitched roofs with 30–50° slope
Open building style
Ridge: parallel to the plot
Knee wall height: 0.5 m (20 inches) from the top of the finished floor to the top of the wall plate
Maximum eaves height: 4 m (13 feet)
Plinth height: 0.70 m (28 inches)
Client requirements
Brick facade is on the wish list.
Possibly a basement, 1.5 or 2 floors
Number of people planned: 2 adults, 2 children (1–3 years)
Space requirements on the ground floor: kitchen, guest WC including shower, dining room, living room, study (without basement + utility room)
Space requirements on the upper floor: bathroom with bathtub and three bedrooms (possibly dressing room)
Kitchen should be open, max. with a movable partition
Carport with tool shed
Sales catalogs and brochures promote or offer what is currently popular. However, they are not technical catalogs. They cover what can mostly be built at the moment.
If you still have an old zoning plan, it likely includes a charming older residential area as well.
I don’t see the problem. You can also create living space under the roof. With a 50-degree roof pitch, you can fit a lot under the roof. Even in a slim house design, a brick veneer finish will look very good.
If you still have an old zoning plan, it likely includes a charming older residential area as well.
I don’t see the problem. You can also create living space under the roof. With a 50-degree roof pitch, you can fit a lot under the roof. Even in a slim house design, a brick veneer finish will look very good.
Subwkloofer28 Aug 2019 08:52Yes, that was originally the plan, but after the first meeting with the architect, we were brought back down to reality quite quickly. The illustration of the house position provided by Escroda matched our expectations perfectly. A 9x11 or 9x12 m (30x36 or 30x39 ft) footprint would have easily met our needs.
However, the architect said that a maximum of 8.5x10.5 m (28x34 ft) would fit, and it would definitely feel cramped. According to him, our ideas for a guest room and utility room would not be feasible.
We might meet with another architect again, as apparently more can fit than was initially suggested.
However, the architect said that a maximum of 8.5x10.5 m (28x34 ft) would fit, and it would definitely feel cramped. According to him, our ideas for a guest room and utility room would not be feasible.
We might meet with another architect again, as apparently more can fit than was initially suggested.
Subwoofer schrieb:
But the architect said that a maximum of 8.5 x 10.5 would fit The site plan appears to be a current surveyor’s map, which should allow for quite accurate measurement. You need to look more closely at the width, but if you assume 8.5 m (28 feet), then at least 12 m (39 feet) of depth is possible. So the restriction on building depth is not understandable, especially since there is no rear building line.
Just contact the plan creator. They should have the exact coordinates and can draw two dimensioned lines perpendicular to the long boundaries on the plan, so that the possibilities can be calculated freely (using intercept theorem).
Subwoofer schrieb:
Ideas for the guest room & utility room Show us.
haydee schrieb:
I would also consider semi-detached houses That is certainly an option. However, I would only consider that if the width is under 7.5 m (25 feet). Until then, I prefer a detached house.
Subwoofer schrieb:
The architect said that a maximum of about 8.5 x 10.5 meters (28 x 34.5 feet) would fit, and it would definitely be cramped and not feasible with our ideas for the guest room and utility room. Hmm... is it because the plot is getting narrower? Is that why there’s a limit of around 10.5 or 12 meters (34.5 or 39.5 feet)?
In that case, couldn’t you possibly build a step on the garden side, meaning the ridge line is shifted a bit, so the house would be one or two meters (3 to 6.5 feet) longer by the garage?
Similar topics