ᐅ New Single-Family Home Construction – Join Us on Our Journey!
Created on: 4 Aug 2022 16:13
G
gregman22
Dear community,
We are finally getting a step closer to realizing our dream of building a single-family home.
The plot has been purchased, building plans have been reviewed, construction method decided, and so on. We have now commissioned the architect of the general contractor (GC) of our choice with the planning task and are currently fine-tuning the house design. I would love to take you along on this journey and incorporate your valuable feedback.
At this stage, the focus is on the house design.
Basic data:
Plot: 1062m2 (11,433 sq ft); approx. 25.5m x 41.64m (84 ft x 137 ft)
Orientation: Northwest -> The arrow in the screenshot of the 3D view points south
Desired room layout:
Ground floor:
First floor:
Attic:
Note: I am still discussing this with the architect. Due to the hipped roof shape, the actual living area has shrunk too much. Therefore, further discussion is needed to accommodate the other rooms. I had underestimated the ratio of gross floor area to usable living space.
Basement:
Additional plans:
Now to my first questions for you:
My biggest construction challenge at the moment is the layout of the attic. There are two alternatives:
- Change the roof type, which would increase costs but provide more usable living space in the attic
- Give up the playroom on the first floor, convert it into a guest room, and build only the two offices in the attic (no guest room or bathroom)
Thank you in advance for your comments.
We are finally getting a step closer to realizing our dream of building a single-family home.
The plot has been purchased, building plans have been reviewed, construction method decided, and so on. We have now commissioned the architect of the general contractor (GC) of our choice with the planning task and are currently fine-tuning the house design. I would love to take you along on this journey and incorporate your valuable feedback.
At this stage, the focus is on the house design.
Basic data:
Plot: 1062m2 (11,433 sq ft); approx. 25.5m x 41.64m (84 ft x 137 ft)
Orientation: Northwest -> The arrow in the screenshot of the 3D view points south
Desired room layout:
Ground floor:
- Large living/dining area with adjacent (but separable) kitchen at the bottom left, plus a gallery overlooking the first floor
- Utility room
- Guest toilet
- Garage
- Separate apartment at the top right with its own entrance for parents-in-law
First floor:
- Gallery overlooking the ground floor
- 2 children’s bedrooms with a shared bathroom
- 1 playroom (initially a home cinema room, later to be repurposed) above the garage
- Master wing with main bedroom, dressing room, and bathroom
Attic:
Note: I am still discussing this with the architect. Due to the hipped roof shape, the actual living area has shrunk too much. Therefore, further discussion is needed to accommodate the other rooms. I had underestimated the ratio of gross floor area to usable living space.
- 2 separate offices
- 1 guest bedroom
- 1 small guest bathroom
Basement:
- 1 technical room
- 1 laundry room
- 1 storage room
- Large fitness room
- Wellness room with sauna
Additional plans:
- Air-to-air heat pump or air-to-water heat pump
- Photovoltaic system with/without battery storage
- Possible pool (3.5/4m x 8m or 3.5/4m x 12m) with heat pump (and countercurrent system)
- Sauna in the basement room
- Air conditioning for various rooms
- Smart home system – most likely via KNX
- Garden: Currently planning 2 terraces – one to the left, slightly more to the south, and one facing the main part of the plot further north
Now to my first questions for you:
- How do the floor plans strike you? Do they make sense in terms of the dynamics of family life?
- The location of the separate apartment was chosen based on our wish. We wanted a strict, clearly defined spatial separation with a separate entrance. Do you have any comments on this?
- Do you consider the utility rooms in the basement to be adequately sized (considering KNX, heat pump, etc.)?
My biggest construction challenge at the moment is the layout of the attic. There are two alternatives:
- Change the roof type, which would increase costs but provide more usable living space in the attic
- Give up the playroom on the first floor, convert it into a guest room, and build only the two offices in the attic (no guest room or bathroom)
Thank you in advance for your comments.
M
Myrna_Loy23 Sep 2022 10:42I would suggest asking the architect to perform a thermal analysis for the building—specifically, the heat transfer through the house’s materials to the interior and also a heat simulation for the outdoor areas. Then have them calculate the cost of removing that heat from the building. The terrace by the pool is likely to become so hot in the peak of summer that it won’t be comfortable to stay there. Dark surfaces can be up to 30°C (54°F) hotter than white surfaces, and this heat is transferred both inward and outward. And there are no overhangs or any effective shading?
I’ve seen these architectural fantasies from the far north of Scandinavia, but it doesn’t get this hot there.
If the facades are made of wood, you will need to repaint them annually. Even with other materials, maintaining a consistent black color involves enormous effort. It will look good for maybe two years at most. After that, you will have areas aging differently, weathering, showing environmental effects. It will become patchy, and not in a way that looks like patina.
I really can only shake my head at so much design with so little sustainability. I know architects love black — so edgy, so sleek, so different. Without having to put effort into complex forms. But there are reasons why buildings haven’t been done like this before. And no, new materials and technologies are not yet advanced enough to prevent synthetic materials from aging. Check the manufacturers’ guarantees for color fastness under weathering—usually 5 to 10 years at best. And these come with tolerances. Under lab conditions.
Sorry for the rant, but this is just one of those wet architect fantasies that completely ignores reality.
I’ve seen these architectural fantasies from the far north of Scandinavia, but it doesn’t get this hot there.
If the facades are made of wood, you will need to repaint them annually. Even with other materials, maintaining a consistent black color involves enormous effort. It will look good for maybe two years at most. After that, you will have areas aging differently, weathering, showing environmental effects. It will become patchy, and not in a way that looks like patina.
I really can only shake my head at so much design with so little sustainability. I know architects love black — so edgy, so sleek, so different. Without having to put effort into complex forms. But there are reasons why buildings haven’t been done like this before. And no, new materials and technologies are not yet advanced enough to prevent synthetic materials from aging. Check the manufacturers’ guarantees for color fastness under weathering—usually 5 to 10 years at best. And these come with tolerances. Under lab conditions.
Sorry for the rant, but this is just one of those wet architect fantasies that completely ignores reality.
M
Myrna_Loy23 Sep 2022 11:03And if you imagine the facade in white, it just looks like any detached house in any new development area. Only bigger. That’s not good architecture. For the budget, I would expect more. More character, more structure. And not a black-painted look.
M
Myrna_Loy23 Sep 2022 11:48I should stop looking at the draft 😉
The missing north-facing terrace of the granny flat for privacy reasons? That could be solved differently—either structurally or with planting. As it is, the north side is even darker than typical north sides, with its solid, looming wall surface. It’s nice that the rendering shows just a grassy meadow there.
The kitchen, where you like to sit for a while in the mornings, faces the street? And for privacy, there are a few trees planted in front. That will make it dark. Plus, all visitors have to pass through this relatively shaded room.
It’s nice that the architect was able to increase the footprint with the single-story addition, but I don’t find it successful at all. The plot feels overcrowded. But of course, that saves costs on outdoor landscaping. 🙂
Upstairs, all rooms have sloped ceilings and skylights, which, to me, is the opposite of luxurious or modern in this form. You can create fantastic spaces with slopes, but this looks more like a prefab house. Meanwhile, a lot of space is wasted on an open void above the dining table, which isn’t even used as a gallery upstairs.
I would have preferred a kind of inserted cube or something similar to create spacious rooms on the upper floor with an open-living feel. This is an inflated concept with a strange orientation.
The missing north-facing terrace of the granny flat for privacy reasons? That could be solved differently—either structurally or with planting. As it is, the north side is even darker than typical north sides, with its solid, looming wall surface. It’s nice that the rendering shows just a grassy meadow there.
The kitchen, where you like to sit for a while in the mornings, faces the street? And for privacy, there are a few trees planted in front. That will make it dark. Plus, all visitors have to pass through this relatively shaded room.
It’s nice that the architect was able to increase the footprint with the single-story addition, but I don’t find it successful at all. The plot feels overcrowded. But of course, that saves costs on outdoor landscaping. 🙂
Upstairs, all rooms have sloped ceilings and skylights, which, to me, is the opposite of luxurious or modern in this form. You can create fantastic spaces with slopes, but this looks more like a prefab house. Meanwhile, a lot of space is wasted on an open void above the dining table, which isn’t even used as a gallery upstairs.
I would have preferred a kind of inserted cube or something similar to create spacious rooms on the upper floor with an open-living feel. This is an inflated concept with a strange orientation.
Myrna_Loy schrieb:
I should stop looking at the draft 😉 Yes, I would put things into some perspective.
Myrna_Loy schrieb:
The missing north-facing terrace for the granny flat due to privacy reasons? That could be solved differently, either architecturally or with planting. As it is, the north side is even darker than typical north sides, with the solid, looming wall. It’s nice that the rendering shows only a grassy meadow there. The bedroom of the granny flat is located on the north side – how bright does a bedroom really need to be? The window front on the east side seems entirely sufficient to me. I had already given a suggestion for implementing a terrace.
Myrna_Loy schrieb:
The kitchen, where you want to sit for a long time in the mornings, faces the street? And for privacy, there are a few trees in front. That will make it dark. And all visitors have to pass through this rather shady room. The kitchen is fully on the south side and is not dark due to this large window front. Trees can be pruned so they don’t block the light inside the rooms. Also, small trees are an option.
Myrna_Loy schrieb:
It’s nice that the architect could further enlarge the footprint with the single-story addition, but I don’t find it successful at all. The property looks cluttered. But of course, that saves costs on landscaping. 🙂 In my opinion, the entire property isn’t even visible on the plan.
Myrna_Loy schrieb:
Upstairs, all rooms have sloping ceilings and skylights, which to me is the opposite of luxurious in this form. That wouldn’t surprise me at all with a pitched roof.
Myrna_Loy schrieb:
You can create fantastic spaces with sloping ceilings, but this looks more like a prefab house. I don’t agree, but taste is certainly subjective.
Myrna_Loy schrieb:
But then a lot of space is wasted on an open void over the dining table, which isn’t even used as a gallery upstairs. I clearly see a gallery there.
Myrna_Loy schrieb:
I would have preferred an inserted cube or something similar to have generous rooms upstairs with an open living feel. This is an exaggerated style with a strange orientation. To enlarge the already huge living area even further? For what purpose?
I have to admit that I would never build this house either. A lot has been said about the black color already; what bothers me more is the terraced house character. Accordingly, the main living area faces the neighbor rather than the garden, which I see as a planning flaw. Living in a terraced house for 2 million? – no thanks! Also, the property is a monster due to the full basement. Roughly half of the living area is underground. It would really be worth considering whether to create a bike cellar etc. with an external staircase that residents can also use. What else should you do with so much basement?
However, the design is not necessarily bad – it does meet your wishes, if I understand correctly.
M
Myrna_Loy23 Sep 2022 13:50For me, a gallery is more than just a hallway. It is more like an open usable area, as shown in the picture.
The size of the plot can be estimated from the renderings by comparing it to the neighboring buildings.
The size of the plot can be estimated from the renderings by comparing it to the neighboring buildings.
gregman22 schrieb:
For the foreseeable future, it will mainly be our two parents staying with us, though at different frequencies. The granny flat will probably be occupied about 50-60% of the year, plus occasional longer visits from other guests. In this concept, the granny flat is already a classic mother-in-law apartment— a positive counterexample (although as a permanent flat for the mother) of @KingSong, whom I recently referenced again just a few days ago. The privacy argument is somewhat odd when the space is used by (in-law) parents and friends, and the question remains about where a future tenant would hang laundry.
OWLer schrieb:
A granny flat as a duplex across two floors with a separate staircase? That could help spread out the space per floor, and for less mobile parents, the stairs could be optimized for a stairlift right away? ... with a private bathroom for the guest tenant, just in case the student brother of @MarlenP drops by *LOL*
gregman22 schrieb:
Currently, it's about 460-470 m2 (4,950-5,050 sq ft) total living and utility space... [...] Another question: The house concept is currently based on solid wood construction. Any comments from your side? LOL: Eco-friendly and sustainable building materials, but the land use is like a high-density apartment block developer. Do you also drive an SUV to the farm shop, as any good Pharisee would?
A concept should be neutral regarding the building material since it belongs to design phase 2, and the choice of materials only comes in design phase 3. There’s still a bit of a glitch here (not in the wood). By the way, for conceptually strong architects in Munich, you can ask @Muc1985.
Myrna_Loy schrieb:
I’m a bit fascinated how an architecture firm in 2022 can design something like this and call it modern and progressive. The ‘Kardashianization’ of architecture is fully implemented here. It’s a shame with such a budget. A missed opportunity to build innovatively. ‘Kardashianization’— absolutely wonderful and fantastic— maestro, a drumroll please!
Myrna_Loy schrieb:
I would ask the architect to perform a thermal calculation for the building — heat transfer through the building materials to the interior, and a heat simulation for the outdoor area. [...] Sorry for the rant, but this is such a damp architect’s fantasy that ignores far too much reality. It seems to me that expecting this architect to put in so much effort and commitment beyond the ‘avant-garde’ design is too much or overestimated.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Similar topics