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
Let’s summarize.
- You want to build an affordable house but have very specific requirements. For that, you need a good designer because the smaller the house, the more challenging it is.
- There are several well-tested floor plans available on the market, but you will have to give up some of your special wishes.
Personally, I would set that design aside as a nice attempt and choose one of the upper options. Why are you feeling such a rush because of the funding? Pressure during the planning phase is a bad advisor, especially for what is probably the biggest investment of your life. Things that are overlooked during planning can often be fixed later, but this costs money—and often more than if you had taken the time to get it right from the start.
- You want to build an affordable house but have very specific requirements. For that, you need a good designer because the smaller the house, the more challenging it is.
- There are several well-tested floor plans available on the market, but you will have to give up some of your special wishes.
Personally, I would set that design aside as a nice attempt and choose one of the upper options. Why are you feeling such a rush because of the funding? Pressure during the planning phase is a bad advisor, especially for what is probably the biggest investment of your life. Things that are overlooked during planning can often be fixed later, but this costs money—and often more than if you had taken the time to get it right from the start.
Hello everyone,
Thank you all for your input and thoughts. We initially thought the floor plan would be relatively easy for a layperson to understand, and we appreciate your objections, even though they do sting a bit. The pressure from the funding requirements is also less than ideal; we will look into our options, but @hanse987 is certainly right about what they said.
We will now focus our efforts on finding a good designer and reviewing standard floor plans again.
But here’s the question: how do I find a good designer? To be honest, I worry about ending up with a design that doesn’t fully realize its potential but costs a lot of money. I am willing to invest in this because a good design can save a lot of money and problems down the line. However, I have read enough threads here where designs by planners were heavily criticized.
How can I minimize this risk?
Thank you all for your input and thoughts. We initially thought the floor plan would be relatively easy for a layperson to understand, and we appreciate your objections, even though they do sting a bit. The pressure from the funding requirements is also less than ideal; we will look into our options, but @hanse987 is certainly right about what they said.
We will now focus our efforts on finding a good designer and reviewing standard floor plans again.
But here’s the question: how do I find a good designer? To be honest, I worry about ending up with a design that doesn’t fully realize its potential but costs a lot of money. I am willing to invest in this because a good design can save a lot of money and problems down the line. However, I have read enough threads here where designs by planners were heavily criticized.
How can I minimize this risk?
I feel that you are sometimes getting caught up in requirements that, when looked at closely, are not such a big deal. For example, I don’t see any problem with placing the children’s rooms on the west side instead of the south side, especially if the rest of the layout would otherwise suffer. With a pitched roof, you usually add roof windows anyway. It could look something like this:
What I find much more questionable is the proposed site plan. The long driveway including the access is quite something. Is it really worth it for the south-facing garden, especially since the terrace would then be facing the street?
If it were mine, I would bring the house and garage closer to the street and probably be happy with a northwest-facing terrace. That is actually an ideal spot in summer.
What I find much more questionable is the proposed site plan. The long driveway including the access is quite something. Is it really worth it for the south-facing garden, especially since the terrace would then be facing the street?
If it were mine, I would bring the house and garage closer to the street and probably be happy with a northwest-facing terrace. That is actually an ideal spot in summer.
K a t j a schrieb:
If it were mine, I would position the house and garage closer to the street and probably be happy with a northwest-facing terrace. Especially in summer, that’s an ideal spot.I would probably do the same: window areas facing south, west, and north, with a terrace on the northwest side. The west terrace also benefits from sunlight coming from the south, while the north side might be more comfortable, at least with a garden view, which could nicely be arranged on the northern slope. An upward slope is always nicer for plants and flower beds; a downward slope is less pleasant because it feels as if you’re tumbling from the property onto the street.
Mone_04 schrieb:
We visited three construction companies and received some good plans (but too large) and some standard designs that didn’t fit at all. That’s why we took a close look at floor plans ourselves and tried to create a design where we wouldn’t have to make many compromises. Since we wanted a side entrance and the living-dining-kitchen area arranged in an L-shape in the southwest of the house, plus both children’s rooms facing south without dormers or miniature gables, we couldn’t find any 1.5-story designs from, for example, prefab house providers.
After many other drafts, we ultimately drew this one ourselves, which we like best overall and which is just about acceptable in size. The bay window for the staircase will probably increase costs, but we hope to reduce these by avoiding a flat roof and extending the roof.
The ceiling height on the ground floor is just an estimate; the staircase is planned for a floor height of 2.83 m (9 ft 3 in), with a tread of 26 cm (10 inches) and a riser of 18 cm (7 inches). Combined with ...
Mone_04 schrieb:
With the optimized draft, we want to approach construction companies and request quotes. All the architects we contacted have a long waiting time, and since we need to apply for funding in spring, that timing wouldn’t work out. ... unfortunately this creates a self-blocking problem in terms of finding solutions.
I won’t have time this quarter to elaborate more on why and where the design doesn’t work (or to develop solutions). I think the scheduling situation will be similar for others. I won’t even offer detailed criticism here because the design fails decisively on a fundamental point (headroom above the staircase) and can’t be economically fixed. So basically, this design is dead in the water. Examples of functioning designs that “didn’t fit at all” and critique of those might help the discussion. I suspect there’s a lack of planning talent and fear that companies asked for proposals will again present unsatisfactory designs as usual. So please share model names and reasons why you didn’t like them.
ypg schrieb:
If cost optimization is your goal, then pick a solid builder or general contractor, take a suitable and reliable standard design from them, and adapt it—possibly by lengthening or shortening, flipping the house plan, rotating one half, or changing the grid layout. Adjust some details, add an affordable highlight (like a bay window, large window, built-in closet, or whatever), and you’ll be happy with a well-built home. hanse987 schrieb:
Let’s summarize:
- You want to build an affordable house but have very specific wishes. You need a good planner because the smaller the house, the more difficult it is.
- There are many well-tested floor plans on the market, but you will have to give up some of your special wishes.
Personally, I would put your design aside as a nice try and choose one of the standard options instead. Why such a rush with the funding? Pressure during planning is a poor advisor, especially for what is likely the biggest investment of your life. Things overlooked in planning can often still be fixed in the second step, but that costs money—often more than if you had taken time right from the start. I can only fully agree with both points.
Mone_04 schrieb:
One more question about the staircase – what exactly is the technical problem with it? I’d like to understand, just out of interest. Would it help if the whole staircase were moved about one or one and a half steps further into the bay window, effectively enlarging the bay and improving the headroom? Or are there other fundamental difficulties I am overlooking? No, that wouldn’t help; it would require a monstrously large “captain’s bay window.” The fact that you don’t grasp this detail despite having drawn it yourself reinforces my fear that you won’t figure this out without an architect. It’s best to abandon this idea of an unprecedented staircase bay window for very good reasons. Your enthusiasm for a house design probably won’t fail just because of a “standard” staircase location, right?
Mone_04 schrieb:
I’d prefer not to publish this design because it’s an uncommon style. Then please at least name the design type without links!
Mone_04 schrieb:
I will post the other design, which we didn’t like as much, tomorrow here—maybe it has more potential than what we saw so far. Great!
Mone_04 schrieb:
From my experience, enthusiasm for tracing a design by an amateur is limited in this forum, since we don’t know what’s important. Well observed!
Mone_04 schrieb:
Here is my question: how do I find a good planner? To be honest, I worry that I might end up with a design that also doesn’t reach its full potential, but that I still paid a lot of money for. I’m willing to spend money because a good design can save a lot of money and problems in the long run. But I have read enough threads here where planners’ designs were heavily criticized. How can I minimize this risk? I’ll wait for your design tomorrow. Otherwise, feel free to contact me—either where you [“Ein Hausbau-Fahrplan, auch für Sie: das Phasenmodell der HOAI!”]
Mone_04 schrieb:
Site slope: yes, gently. Over the total length of the plot of about 28 m (92 feet), it rises around 1.5 to 2 m (5 to 6.5 feet) from the street (south) upwards. ... doesn’t sound like a need for a custom design to me, so you might also consider hiring an independent building consultant to help select and customize a catalog home.
The plans most heavily criticized here from planners tend to come from “drawing slaves” (draftsmen or architects employed by general contractors), mainly because amateur plans improved this way are only very imperfectly fixed. With moderate adjustments of standard house plans, you have good chances to create a suitable home for a “normal family” (two adults, two children, no exotic pets or horses) and to get things moving quickly. With the upcoming federal election, the time pressure is easing anyway, as current funding programs are unlikely to remain unchanged through a government change.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
K a t j a schrieb:
It could look something like this Thank you for this suggestion. I had something similar in mind before, but my upper floor was completely different. Since I didn’t rotate the ridge, it didn’t work out so well. The only thing I’m not so happy about on the upper floor is the options for placing wardrobes. In the kids’ rooms, it shouldn’t be much of an issue due to their size, but in the bedroom it would be ideal if the wardrobes could be placed behind the door so the room can be arranged better. Of course, that’s only possible if the utility room is shortened accordingly, or does anyone see other options?
K a t j a schrieb:
If it were mine, I would bring the house and garage closer to the street and probably be happy with a northwest-facing terrace. Especially in summer, that’s the ideal spot. Thanks for your and @ypg opinions. It’s definitely something to consider; so far we have been very focused on having a south-facing garden. We will think it through again. But how would you handle a house so close to a street (a 30 km/h (about 20 mph) zone and just an access road for the rest of the residential area with maybe 15 houses) in terms of windows and room layout? Would you still orient the kitchen/dining area to the southwest and the living room to the west-north, as originally planned? I can’t quite imagine what it would be like to have such an open dining area so close to the street, but maybe that’s just a mental barrier. I would appreciate some impressions here.
11ant schrieb:
But the fact that, despite your own drawing, you don’t fully understand this particular detail confirms my concerns that you won’t figure it out without an architect. Thanks to your feedback, I realized this—I have no idea why we had such a blind spot. I always only saw the first landing as the problem, not the entire headroom issue.
11ant schrieb:
With the federal election coming up, the time pressure is off anyway, since current funding programs probably won’t remain largely unchanged after a change in government. Fortunately, this is a state-level subsidy. But of course, even that is never guaranteed.
Similar topics