ᐅ Semi-detached house with unequal halves = different floor plans
Created on: 6 Nov 2018 21:56
M
MadameP
Preface: The larger half on the north side (right on the plan) is intended for personal use. The smaller "half" on the south side (left on the plan) is for sale. For the sales half, the only requirement was a practical use of space for 3, max. 4 people. Therefore, I will go into more detail regarding the personal half.
Since this is not obvious from the floor plan excerpts: the personal half is 8.75 m (29 feet) wide and 9 m (30 feet) deep, the sales half is 6.10 m (20 feet) wide and 9.65 m (32 feet) deep (external dimensions).
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 479 sqm (5155 sq ft), 23 m (75 ft) wide, 20.80 m (68 ft) deep
Slope: sloping southwest, approx. 3 m (10 ft) across the northeast-southwest diagonal
Site coverage ratio: 0.35
Floor area ratio: 0.7
Building envelope, building line and boundary: 3 m (10 ft) setback line, no specific building envelope
Adjacent buildings: neighbors’ garage on the south boundary
Parking spaces: 2 per dwelling unit
Number of floors: 2 full floors
Roof type: pitched roof 25-45 degrees, exposed rafters, half-hipped roof, vented ridge
Maximum heights / limits: max. ridge height 9.50 m (31 ft)
Additional requirements: none
Client Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: modern, clean lines, simple building form, gable roof
Basement, floors: no basement, 2 full floors plus attic
Number of occupants, ages: 3 (2 adults + baby, no more expected); the second semi-detached unit should accommodate a family with up to 2 children
Space requirements on ground and upper floors for own half:
Ground floor: guest WC, wardrobe, large open living/dining area, open kitchen, utility/technical room
First floor: large children’s room, master bedroom, family bathroom, laundry room
Attic: studio (office / guest room / hobby room), shower room
Office: both family use and home office
Guests per year: approx. 20 nights, 1–4 people
Open or closed architecture:
Conservative or modern design: modern
Open kitchen, cooking island: both
Number of seats at dining table: 8
Fireplace: undecided
Sound/music wall: no
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: no, parking spaces only
Kitchen garden, greenhouse: no
Other wishes / special features / daily routines and reasons why some things should be included or excluded: For the personal half, there was a requirement for a half-landing staircase that is not accessible from the living area. A design away from the “classic semi-detached house standard” was desired, including externally. No “entrance corridor”.
House Design
Designed by: architect
What do you particularly like? Why?
Personal half:
- Split level to the living area, creating high ceilings in the open living space and making use of the topography
- large wardrobe/coat area
- storage space utilized under the staircase
- utility room on the first floor
- large children’s room (intended to be swapped with the attic studio when the child is older)
Sales half:
- ?
What do you dislike? Why?
Personal half:
- Utility room only accessible from outside (wtf?!)
- Open living space rather small
- Kitchen is small, no island, dining area only for 6 people
- Guest WC wastes space
- Overall few and small windows
- Family bathroom layout: shower exit directly in front of the door, toilet right next to the sink
- No dressing room
- Attic bathroom: again, shower exit directly in front of the door
- Attic studio windows: tiny arrow slit window facing west (the side with the really great view) and two roof windows. (my next wtf moment)
Sales half:
- No second shower bathroom
- First floor bathroom tiny, no shower
- Boring floor plan
- Second room in attic without a window?! (again a wtf moment)
Price estimate according to planner: just within budget (prefer not to discuss figures publicly due to sales plans, thanks for understanding)
Preferred heating system: ideally geothermal, if still within budget
If you have to give up something, which details/extras
- can you do without: geothermal heating, attic bathroom (would at first only install plumbing, finish later)
- can you not do without: half-landing staircase
Why is the design as it currently is?
Our requirements regarding the space program were largely implemented.
Which requests did the architect fulfill?
Offset in height and depth between the two halves, staircase not opening off the living room, utility room on the first floor
What do you consider especially good or bad?
The arrangement, location and size of the windows raise major questions for me.
Furthermore, I don’t understand why the plot width isn’t fully used. We are fine with 3.50 m (11.5 ft) on the sides for parking. For the sales half, we’d leave 3 m (10 ft) to preserve garden space at the back. The very first study was even more “tube-shaped,” and we already pointed that out. Now the northern half still has 4.12 m (13.5 ft) and the southern 3.93 m (13 ft) width on the sides. Why?? Dead space next to the cars that we won’t use, instead of garden space facing west.
What is the most important/basic question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
What can we do better?
Since this is not obvious from the floor plan excerpts: the personal half is 8.75 m (29 feet) wide and 9 m (30 feet) deep, the sales half is 6.10 m (20 feet) wide and 9.65 m (32 feet) deep (external dimensions).
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 479 sqm (5155 sq ft), 23 m (75 ft) wide, 20.80 m (68 ft) deep
Slope: sloping southwest, approx. 3 m (10 ft) across the northeast-southwest diagonal
Site coverage ratio: 0.35
Floor area ratio: 0.7
Building envelope, building line and boundary: 3 m (10 ft) setback line, no specific building envelope
Adjacent buildings: neighbors’ garage on the south boundary
Parking spaces: 2 per dwelling unit
Number of floors: 2 full floors
Roof type: pitched roof 25-45 degrees, exposed rafters, half-hipped roof, vented ridge
Maximum heights / limits: max. ridge height 9.50 m (31 ft)
Additional requirements: none
Client Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: modern, clean lines, simple building form, gable roof
Basement, floors: no basement, 2 full floors plus attic
Number of occupants, ages: 3 (2 adults + baby, no more expected); the second semi-detached unit should accommodate a family with up to 2 children
Space requirements on ground and upper floors for own half:
Ground floor: guest WC, wardrobe, large open living/dining area, open kitchen, utility/technical room
First floor: large children’s room, master bedroom, family bathroom, laundry room
Attic: studio (office / guest room / hobby room), shower room
Office: both family use and home office
Guests per year: approx. 20 nights, 1–4 people
Open or closed architecture:
Conservative or modern design: modern
Open kitchen, cooking island: both
Number of seats at dining table: 8
Fireplace: undecided
Sound/music wall: no
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: no, parking spaces only
Kitchen garden, greenhouse: no
Other wishes / special features / daily routines and reasons why some things should be included or excluded: For the personal half, there was a requirement for a half-landing staircase that is not accessible from the living area. A design away from the “classic semi-detached house standard” was desired, including externally. No “entrance corridor”.
House Design
Designed by: architect
What do you particularly like? Why?
Personal half:
- Split level to the living area, creating high ceilings in the open living space and making use of the topography
- large wardrobe/coat area
- storage space utilized under the staircase
- utility room on the first floor
- large children’s room (intended to be swapped with the attic studio when the child is older)
Sales half:
- ?
What do you dislike? Why?
Personal half:
- Utility room only accessible from outside (wtf?!)
- Open living space rather small
- Kitchen is small, no island, dining area only for 6 people
- Guest WC wastes space
- Overall few and small windows
- Family bathroom layout: shower exit directly in front of the door, toilet right next to the sink
- No dressing room
- Attic bathroom: again, shower exit directly in front of the door
- Attic studio windows: tiny arrow slit window facing west (the side with the really great view) and two roof windows. (my next wtf moment)
Sales half:
- No second shower bathroom
- First floor bathroom tiny, no shower
- Boring floor plan
- Second room in attic without a window?! (again a wtf moment)
Price estimate according to planner: just within budget (prefer not to discuss figures publicly due to sales plans, thanks for understanding)
Preferred heating system: ideally geothermal, if still within budget
If you have to give up something, which details/extras
- can you do without: geothermal heating, attic bathroom (would at first only install plumbing, finish later)
- can you not do without: half-landing staircase
Why is the design as it currently is?
Our requirements regarding the space program were largely implemented.
Which requests did the architect fulfill?
Offset in height and depth between the two halves, staircase not opening off the living room, utility room on the first floor
What do you consider especially good or bad?
The arrangement, location and size of the windows raise major questions for me.
Furthermore, I don’t understand why the plot width isn’t fully used. We are fine with 3.50 m (11.5 ft) on the sides for parking. For the sales half, we’d leave 3 m (10 ft) to preserve garden space at the back. The very first study was even more “tube-shaped,” and we already pointed that out. Now the northern half still has 4.12 m (13.5 ft) and the southern 3.93 m (13 ft) width on the sides. Why?? Dead space next to the cars that we won’t use, instead of garden space facing west.
What is the most important/basic question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
What can we do better?
11ant schrieb:
Changing anything less than everything wouldn’t make a difference: a different roof means different ridge heights in the attic, which means a) a different headroom above the staircase landing, so a different stair position, and b) a different distribution of standing height in the attic, which leads to a different floor plan—and as a consequence of all this, keeping the same footprint is out of the question. This realization actually came to me last night after a long time of thinking and rearranging. Katja had once posted a floor plan in the old thread with the staircase in the southeast corner, and I just can’t get it out of my head. However, it fails with the ridge running east-west in terms of headroom above the stair exit in the attic. Still, I think it is better overall...
11ant schrieb:
I consider that an indicator of an awkwardly chosen difference in house width and/or roof pitch. I can’t recall right now: did you ever consider my suggestion of a slanted party wall? That’s probably true. The roof pitch is fixed and not negotiable. Basically, to make it work, we’d have to make the house narrower and deeper. Unfortunately, the shape of the plot speaks against that. It’s already a “towel”—wider than deep. Making the house narrow and deep would create garden space on the side of the house but take away the nice space behind the house to the west. So the lot is better built wider rather than narrower.
We haven’t explored the slanted party wall yet. I have no idea what that might look like right now or what it would mean in terms of the roof. Can you help me understand your suggestion?
11ant schrieb:
A “studio” is just a euphemism for leftover space, just as a “hobby room” in the basement is. The use is a multifunctional, chameleon-like jumble. From my point of view, these are architecturally shameful rooms. These are spaces designed to justify the broker’s phrase “everything is possible.” The difference is usually that in the studio, the clutter is more intellectual (never or long-ignored books), while in the basement it’s more party supplies. On that, I disagree. I think it’s fine to have a room where you store things you don’t need daily (like my sewing machine and hobby materials, seasonal clothing, outgrown children’s clothes) and that also offers the possibility to be used as a guest or work room. Storage doesn’t have to mean junk room; it can be arranged neatly and attractively.
The alternative would be a separate office, guest room, and hobby room, each quite small, which to me would completely fragment the floor plan.
11ant schrieb:
So the ridge direction of the second half of the house is perpendicular to the first? Exactly. In this layout, the width of the plot would be used better. You would effectively create a kind of “corner courtyard.” I’m attaching a screenshot from the initial massing study (just a rough attempt!! It was only about feasibility regarding building height etc.)
11ant schrieb:
It’s not just about sleeping area (floor space), but also room volume. You don’t want to just sleep tired. That means the room either needs appropriate air exchange rates or enough volume so that the used air doesn’t become “concentrated.” I’d rather not set up an additional mechanical ventilation zone with turbo air exchange just because I planned the room too small. What is the minimum size a bedroom should be?
In the temperature range from 0 to 25°C (32 to 77°F), we almost always sleep with the window open...
MadameP schrieb:
I'm attaching a screenshot of the initial height study (just a very rough attempt!! It was only about feasibility regarding the single-family house etc.)I find this option really exciting. If it fits spatially, I think that's very cool.MadameP schrieb:
How large does a bedroom need to be at minimum?
In the temperature range of 0 to 25 degrees Celsius (32 to 77 degrees Fahrenheit), we almost always sleep with the window open...I usually consider 12 square meters (130 square feet) as the minimum size for a bedroom. It can be smaller—some manage with 10 square meters (108 square feet)—but that wouldn't be enough for me.M
Mottenhausen9 Nov 2018 10:18MadameP schrieb:
It would basically create a kind of "corner courtyard." I'm attaching a screenshot of the initial height studyIf you definitely want visually separate building volumes, this option is MUCH BETTER! I really like it!
ypg schrieb:
Is this allowed from a fire protection perspective? The architect says yes, including for obtaining the building permit / planning permission. (In our case, it’s a notification procedure anyway.) Since he has been building residential houses for 20 years, I don’t have any reason to doubt that for now...
What could the fire protection issue be?
Similar topics