Hello everyone,
we would like to share our design with you to get feedback and suggestions for improvements, as well as to identify any potential issues.
With the optimized design, we plan to approach construction companies for quotes. All the architects we contacted have long waiting times, and since we need to apply for funding in spring, that would not be feasible timing-wise.
What do we want to build?
A single-family house with a maximum of 160 m² (approximately 1720 sq ft) according to the living space regulations (with the terrace counted proportionally) in order to qualify for funding.
Development plan / restrictions
Plot size: 645 m² (approximately 0.16 acres)
Slope: yes, slight. The plot is about 28 m (92 feet) long and rises about 1.5 – 2 m (5 – 6.5 feet) from the street (south) upwards.
Site coverage ratio: 0.4
Floor area ratio: 0.8
Building envelope, building line and boundary: The building boundary is 2.5 m (8 feet) from the front and rear (as viewed from the street). Roof overhangs may project up to 1 m (3 feet) beyond the building boundaries, provided the setback requirements of the state building code BW are met. Garages may be built outside the buildable areas.
Border development: Neighbor’s garage to the west on the boundary, see site plan. Both neighbors east and west have already built. On the opposite street side (south) is still a free building plot. North is a field with no planned development.
Number of parking spaces: 2, preferably a double garage.
Number of floors: 2 possible.
Roof shape: free choice.
Style: free choice.
Orientation: southwest (SW).
Maximum height limits: maximum height of 8.5 m (28 feet) measured from the ground floor level to the highest point of the roof structure (for roofs up to 7°, only 7.5 m / 25 feet height allowed).
Other requirements: ground floor height max. 0.5 m (1.6 feet) above street level; mandatory photovoltaic system (BW), mandatory cistern (~6 m³ (1580 gallons)).
Client requirements
Style, roof shape, building type: classic gable roof house, 30° roof pitch, 1.4 m (4.6 feet) knee wall.
Basement, floors: no basement, 1.5 floors.
Number of occupants, age: 3 persons, ages 32, 28, 0.
Space requirements on ground floor (GF) and upper floor (UF):
GF: living-dining-kitchen approx. 45 m² (484 sq ft), office/guest room approx. 10 m² (108 sq ft), utility/technical room approx. 8-10 m² (86-108 sq ft), shower bathroom approx. 4 m² (43 sq ft).
UF (all net floor area): bedroom approx. 14 m² (151 sq ft), bathroom with laundry room approx. 16 m² (172 sq ft), 2 children’s rooms approx. 16 m² (172 sq ft) each.
Office: family use or home office?
Since we currently plan for only one child, the office on the GF should serve as storage and guest room; the second "children’s room" will be used as an office. Approximately 15 guests per year; home office about 3 days per week.
Open or closed architecture: open.
Conservative or modern style: more or less modern.
Open kitchen, kitchen island: yes.
Number of dining seats: normally 4, extendable up to 12.
Fireplace: no.
Music/stereo wall: no.
Balcony, roof terrace: no.
Garage, carport: yes, preferably double garage at least 6 x 7 m (20 x 23 feet).
Utility garden, greenhouse: no.
Additional wishes / special features / daily routine, including reasons for certain choices or exclusions:
House design
Who designed it: Do-it-Yourself.
What do you like most and why?
What do you dislike and why?
Cost estimate by architect/planner: -
Personal budget limit for the house, including fittings: €520,000 (around US $570,000), excluding landscaping, must be reduced by personal labor.
Preferred heating system: not decided yet, no fossil fuels allowed, likely air-to-water heat pump.
If you had to give up something, on which details or expansions could you do without:
What could you not do without:
Why is the design the way it is?
We approached three construction companies, received some good but too large plans, and some standard plans that did not fit at all. Therefore, we studied floor plans intensively and tried to create a design with as few compromises as possible. Because of our wish for a side entrance and the living-dining-kitchen area arranged as an L-shape on the southwest side of the house and the two children’s rooms facing south without dormers or small gables, we couldn’t find 1.5-story designs from prefab house providers that fit.
After considering many other designs, we ultimately drew this one ourselves, which we basically like best and is just acceptable in size. The bay window for the stairs will probably cause extra costs, but we hope to compensate by omitting a flat roof and extending the roof line.
The ground floor ceiling height is an assumption; the stairs are planned for a floor height of 2.83 m (9.3 feet), with 26 cm (10 inches) tread depth and 18 cm (7 inches) riser height.
In addition to comments and suggestions on the floor plan, we also have the following questions:
Thank you very much in advance for your help! I will gladly provide any information available if needed.
Please be kind, this is my first post and
we would like to share our design with you to get feedback and suggestions for improvements, as well as to identify any potential issues.
With the optimized design, we plan to approach construction companies for quotes. All the architects we contacted have long waiting times, and since we need to apply for funding in spring, that would not be feasible timing-wise.
What do we want to build?
A single-family house with a maximum of 160 m² (approximately 1720 sq ft) according to the living space regulations (with the terrace counted proportionally) in order to qualify for funding.
Development plan / restrictions
Plot size: 645 m² (approximately 0.16 acres)
Slope: yes, slight. The plot is about 28 m (92 feet) long and rises about 1.5 – 2 m (5 – 6.5 feet) from the street (south) upwards.
Site coverage ratio: 0.4
Floor area ratio: 0.8
Building envelope, building line and boundary: The building boundary is 2.5 m (8 feet) from the front and rear (as viewed from the street). Roof overhangs may project up to 1 m (3 feet) beyond the building boundaries, provided the setback requirements of the state building code BW are met. Garages may be built outside the buildable areas.
Border development: Neighbor’s garage to the west on the boundary, see site plan. Both neighbors east and west have already built. On the opposite street side (south) is still a free building plot. North is a field with no planned development.
Number of parking spaces: 2, preferably a double garage.
Number of floors: 2 possible.
Roof shape: free choice.
Style: free choice.
Orientation: southwest (SW).
Maximum height limits: maximum height of 8.5 m (28 feet) measured from the ground floor level to the highest point of the roof structure (for roofs up to 7°, only 7.5 m / 25 feet height allowed).
Other requirements: ground floor height max. 0.5 m (1.6 feet) above street level; mandatory photovoltaic system (BW), mandatory cistern (~6 m³ (1580 gallons)).
Client requirements
Style, roof shape, building type: classic gable roof house, 30° roof pitch, 1.4 m (4.6 feet) knee wall.
Basement, floors: no basement, 1.5 floors.
Number of occupants, age: 3 persons, ages 32, 28, 0.
Space requirements on ground floor (GF) and upper floor (UF):
GF: living-dining-kitchen approx. 45 m² (484 sq ft), office/guest room approx. 10 m² (108 sq ft), utility/technical room approx. 8-10 m² (86-108 sq ft), shower bathroom approx. 4 m² (43 sq ft).
UF (all net floor area): bedroom approx. 14 m² (151 sq ft), bathroom with laundry room approx. 16 m² (172 sq ft), 2 children’s rooms approx. 16 m² (172 sq ft) each.
Office: family use or home office?
Since we currently plan for only one child, the office on the GF should serve as storage and guest room; the second "children’s room" will be used as an office. Approximately 15 guests per year; home office about 3 days per week.
Open or closed architecture: open.
Conservative or modern style: more or less modern.
Open kitchen, kitchen island: yes.
Number of dining seats: normally 4, extendable up to 12.
Fireplace: no.
Music/stereo wall: no.
Balcony, roof terrace: no.
Garage, carport: yes, preferably double garage at least 6 x 7 m (20 x 23 feet).
Utility garden, greenhouse: no.
Additional wishes / special features / daily routine, including reasons for certain choices or exclusions:
- The kitchen should not be visible from the sofa (when sitting).
- The living-dining area with kitchen should be the “heart” of the house.
- The shower bathroom and stairs (and if possible the guest room) should not be accessible through the dirt zone at the entrance door.
- Sufficient cloakroom space.
- Washing machine & dryer in the bathroom on the upper floor, as laundry accumulates there, but separated from the children’s rooms by the hallway.
- Gable or dormer facing southeast (street side) due to the view.
- No dormers or more costly architectural features due to cost reasons.
- Terrace mainly on the southwest side to catch evening sun. It will later be covered with a pergola. A 3 m (10 feet) lift-and-slide door would be ideal.
- Ground floor ceiling height at least 2.5 m (8.2 feet), upper floor 2.4 m (7.9 feet) is acceptable.
House design
Who designed it: Do-it-Yourself.
What do you like most and why?
- Spacious living-dining-kitchen area with kitchen not visible from the living room.
- Light-flooded living spaces.
- Possibility to later separate the living room with, for example, glass elements.
- Space available for furniture placement in living room.
- Modern feel due to open staircase.
- Staircase accessible from living area (natural access to bathroom or bedroom).
- Visual axis from entrance to garden through window behind the stairs, without having a view of the entrance door from the rooms.
- Implementation of basic wishes (number of rooms, orientation, functionality, etc.).
- Minimal actual hallway area on ground floor.
What do you dislike and why?
- No separation from upper floor possible.
- Head clearance to the first landing of the stairs is critical.
- Overhang in front of left children’s room is wasted space.
- No window in the shower bathroom on the ground floor.
- Dirt corridor & relevant rooms are separated.
- If a second child comes, there is little storage space.
- With about 155 m² (1668 sq ft), relatively large (and therefore expensive).
- Exterior appearance, but we have not focused on this as a priority so far.
- Southwest terrace has a possible sliding door that is too small (currently 1.5 m / 5 feet), so this door is planned 3 m (10 feet) slightly to the south instead.
- No pantry; we would consider a small cupboard and fridge-freezer in the technical room if space permits.
- Very long driveway.
- Unfortunately relatively close to neighbor’s plot on the southwest side.
Cost estimate by architect/planner: -
Personal budget limit for the house, including fittings: €520,000 (around US $570,000), excluding landscaping, must be reduced by personal labor.
Preferred heating system: not decided yet, no fossil fuels allowed, likely air-to-water heat pump.
If you had to give up something, on which details or expansions could you do without:
- Large guest/work/storage room.
- Shower on ground floor.
What could you not do without:
- Laundry room on upper floor.
- Side entrance to the house.
- Generous living-dining-kitchen area.
Why is the design the way it is?
We approached three construction companies, received some good but too large plans, and some standard plans that did not fit at all. Therefore, we studied floor plans intensively and tried to create a design with as few compromises as possible. Because of our wish for a side entrance and the living-dining-kitchen area arranged as an L-shape on the southwest side of the house and the two children’s rooms facing south without dormers or small gables, we couldn’t find 1.5-story designs from prefab house providers that fit.
After considering many other designs, we ultimately drew this one ourselves, which we basically like best and is just acceptable in size. The bay window for the stairs will probably cause extra costs, but we hope to compensate by omitting a flat roof and extending the roof line.
The ground floor ceiling height is an assumption; the stairs are planned for a floor height of 2.83 m (9.3 feet), with 26 cm (10 inches) tread depth and 18 cm (7 inches) riser height.
In addition to comments and suggestions on the floor plan, we also have the following questions:
- Is the size of the living area including the stairs structurally feasible without issues?
- How complicated and expensive would ventilation for the shower bathroom on the ground floor be?
- Is the head clearance for the staircase sufficient?
- Are knee wall windows, as planned in the children’s room, worthwhile? We see advantages in improved lighting for a small seating area and ventilation possibilities via a tilt window.
Thank you very much in advance for your help! I will gladly provide any information available if needed.
Please be kind, this is my first post and
motorradsilke schrieb:
The combination is automatic, right? I understood that you still use a regular swing door elsewhere and were referring to that combination.
motorradsilke schrieb:
But in fact, we don’t use it daily to go outside; usually the swing door located a bit further away is used for that.motorradsilke schrieb:
Attempts at persuasion like this, in my opinion, cannot work in a forum because you would need much more background knowledge about the person you are trying to convince, which they may not want to share publicly.I would not just share my opinion or conviction with anyone, but precisely with the person who, for example, asks a question here in the forum or takes part in the discussion. Whether this leads to concrete results, I cannot say either, but I at least hope that it inspires some thoughts or ideas. Often, the path to the desired goal is long and winding.Therefore, my contributions in the forum aim exactly as you describe: to present the fullest possible context of a situation, which already begins when filling out the questionnaire. All these factors—the building permit / planning permission, age, income, children, individual lifestyle, etc.—are exactly the necessary context to provide the most helpful answer or opinion possible.
If someone is reluctant to share personal background information, then a rather limited quality of response must be expected; ultimately, everyone decides for themselves the degree of help they are willing to receive.
As I have mentioned elsewhere, I have noticed more and more of this kind of initial reservation and closedness in the forum. However, that does not mean I have to adapt to this change myself. I still share personal details and openly engage in direct contact with members, because I always take something away from that as well.
motorradsilke schrieb:
Your example of the electric car is perfect for this. It (still) doesn’t fit everyone. And not everyone wants to disclose all their thoughts and facts about it.An (electric) car will never be suitable for everyone; for example, my cousin will never want to drive a car at all, while my nephew has three diesel vehicles in his garage. Nevertheless, I am interested in their backgrounds and share mine during conversations about our two electric cars; both can coexist and can be the better option depending on the individual context.If I participate seriously in a knowledge forum, I should be willing to share the context of my situation or the reasons behind my opinions. Otherwise, I would question what the purpose of participating in the forum is, since by using the internet and other means, I have already exposed my privacy to the maximum extent, whether I like it or not.
motorradsilke schrieb:
Attempts at persuasion like this, in my opinion, cannot work in a forum because you would need much more background knowledge about the person you are trying to convince, which they may not want to share publicly. Your example of the electric car is perfect for this. It (still) doesn’t fit everyone. And not everyone wants to disclose all their thoughts and facts about it. Therefore, this unfortunately often turns into preaching.That is often true, but as always, it also depends on each individual to improve this interaction. For that, I am gladly a very committed optimist despite significant hardships in my life.Fundamentally, we may not be that far apart after all, and if we are, that is not a problem. My earlier life with a large sliding door was not better or worse than life without one now; there are multiple ways to approach things.
ypg schrieb:
I think we are talking past each other I think so too, and I suspect you are mixing up some things here:
ypg schrieb:
However, lift-and-slide doors are quite heavy to handle.
My parents have a 6-meter (20 feet) wide sliding door. The lever lifts very easily, and sliding is smooth too. Even 80-year-olds can manage that. With a lift-and-slide door, I can only operate it at friends’ houses with instructions. The market-dominant version is the “lift-and-slide” type, usually with a rotary lever to lift the sash from the sealing position and lower it back into the lock, on whose knob you also push the heavy panel. The ease of operation strongly depends on the sash size. Less common is the parallel slide-and-tilt variant (PSK), which is probably the type described in post #86 by @motorradsilke. This is almost like a floor-to-ceiling tilt window that either tilts or slides sideways. From what I know, owners often worry about guests mistakenly operating the handle (which resembles a tilt-and-turn window handle) causing damage.
motorradsilke schrieb:
A lift-and-slide door always has one fixed panel and one sliding panel. That’s how I know it at least. The version with both halves sliding (main sash as described above, side sash with a recessed locking slide without lifting requirement) is a very rarely ordered option.
ypg schrieb:
The advantage of a lift-and-slide door is that it is better insulated and therefore fits today’s standards. Better insulated compared to what? — Due to the overall weight of the glass units (we had widths up to 6 meters (20 feet) per “sash”), double glazing is often used here. In popular sizes, usually up to 4 meters (13 feet) wide in total, classic triple glazing is still manageable.
ypg schrieb:
Folding doors are apparently still somewhat more expensive. Yes, significantly more than lift-and-slide doors, and even more so compared to hinged doors. In return, folding doors offer the widest possible clear opening/passage width. We never offered PSK doors, and I never sold them later either.
Arauki11 schrieb:
Attempts to preach should be avoided. However, I don’t find it problematic to try to convince someone of an opinion, as long as it is clearly distinguished from preaching. If I saw a significant mistake, I would consider it appropriate to clearly point it out as such. I agree. As a matter of duty, I point out to those seeking advice that the more contemporary (today and tomorrow) types, beyond the rather minor stylistic advantage over the lift-and-slide doors popular the day before yesterday, yesterday, and today, are also more cost-effective. I prefer to preach when it comes to what I consider the obsolescence of house-garage side doors.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
M
motorradsilke12 Jan 2025 12:0611ant schrieb:
The market-leading option is the "lift-and-slide" door, usually operated with a pivot lever that lifts the door out of and lowers it into the locking position; the door is then pushed using the lever handle. The ease of operation largely depends on the door’s size. A less common type is the parallel-slide-and-tilt (PSK) door, which seems to be the one mentioned in post #86 by @motorradsilke. This functions like a floor-to-ceiling tilt window that can be tilted or slid to the side. In my experience, owners often become quite anxious about incorrect operation, especially if guests come near the control lever, which resembles that of a tilt-and-turn window.
No, this is a lift-and-slide door, not a tilt door.
As I said, once you have a short explanation, the mechanism is easy to understand and operate. Turn the vertically positioned lever down and to the right until it stops, then return it to the horizontal position; pull the door panel open as far as desired using the lever. To close, slide the panel fully to the left until it stops and then turn the lever up.
K a t j a schrieb:
Well, I have one more:Thank you very much for this draft! We basically like it a lot. We especially appreciate how the carport is integrated, the "only" quarter-turn staircase, the option to separate the living room, and the separate utility room for laundry on the upper floor.There are two things we are not so happy with:
- The position of the staircase including the dormer: In the south (unfortunately facing the street) we have a view of the Alps. We would like to be able to see this view, either through a dormer or, as we originally thought, by rotating the ridge by 90°.
- I am still not quite convinced by the open living space arranged in a U-shape. Somehow, to me, it doesn’t feel as cozy as it would with an L-shape.
I really like the kitchen on the south side facing the street and the living room in the northwest. We can also now imagine the position of the house on the plot as it is.
Do you have any ideas for the two points mentioned that we don’t like?
11ant schrieb:
Lift-and-slide doors are tomorrow’s retro, and especially with a total width of 3m (10 feet) it is a less favorable format. Why call it a "dream"?Behind the "dream," as partly suspected, is the wish to be able to go outside without obstructing the room (unlike an inward-opening swing door). And this is combined with a large glass surface. I think the suggestions that came up in the discussion are great. They encourage reflection on the reasons behind the "dream" and what really makes sense here.By the way, thank you very much for the pictures of your solutions.
Arauki11 schrieb:
Really? We have 6 x 9 m (20 x 30 ft) including storage and I find that quite comfortable.Regarding the carport, we have actually become much more open-minded by now. We have to agree with you; there are other options besides double garages where you can save a lot of money that could be better invested in other, more meaningful things. Thanks for your inspiration and your persistence regarding practical sense!
Mone_04 schrieb:
Do you have any ideas regarding the two points mentioned that we’re not so happy with? So, where do you want to have the view from the upper floor to the outside? Does it not matter? Then just add a dormer window in the bathroom roof. That might not sound very romantic at first, but the bathroom is actually one of the most frequently used rooms on the upper floor. Plus, everyone uses it and you really appreciate getting up in the morning.
Alternatively, you could mirror the floor plan vertically so that the staircase faces south. However, this would have the drawback that the guest room would only have an east-facing window and the utility room would be further away from the street. On the other hand, this could make a small pantry under the stairs possible.
Similar topics