ᐅ Single-family house (2 floors + finished basement + converted attic), approximately 200 sqm – modifications
Created on: 20 Oct 2019 21:50
G
grericht
Hello,
We are currently working with an architect on the design of our single-family home. Since we have three children, the house should accommodate several future scenarios. These include:
Plot:
Since the plot already has a building, and we want to keep the rear building (it is fully shaded by the apartment building, is in reasonable condition, and might provide future expansion potential—at least suitable for workshops and storage), and since the plot is not very large, we decided on a tall house with a small footprint.
About the house
We have already developed a fairly comfortable floor plan with our chosen architect. Our biggest concern is accidentally planning a wall or something else 5 cm (2 inches) too far to the left or right and then being unable to fit our furniture. I would appreciate it if you would be interested in looking over the current design and giving feedback.
We are currently working with an architect on the design of our single-family home. Since we have three children, the house should accommodate several future scenarios. These include:
- Enough space for everyone
- At some point, the children will move out, and we will downsize to the living basement while renting out the rest
- One or two children might continue living with us (multi-generational living) – possibly in the basement with a separate entrance
- Possibly one child even starts a family in the house, and we move to the basement
Plot:
- 710 sqm (8,000 sq ft) close to the city center
- To the south is our rear building (two stories) attached to a 3.5-story apartment building (boundary development)
- To the north and west are the streets (a corner plot)
- Behind to the west is a large green plot with a single-family house
- To the north beyond the street are apartment buildings
- To the east there is a narrow parking lot followed by a green recreational garden area
- We have to keep a 6 m (20 ft) setback to the streets and the usual 3 m (10 ft) to the parking lot
Since the plot already has a building, and we want to keep the rear building (it is fully shaded by the apartment building, is in reasonable condition, and might provide future expansion potential—at least suitable for workshops and storage), and since the plot is not very large, we decided on a tall house with a small footprint.
About the house
- Eder XP9 or 10 (timber frame) in 42.5 or 49 cm (17 or 19 inches) thickness
- Living basement (150 cm (5 ft) below ground / 100 cm (3 ft) above ground) – if affordable (this allows for the utility room in the basement and more space on the ground floor for a large open-plan living/dining/kitchen area as the main living space)
- Knee wall either 150 cm (5 ft) or, if not much more expensive, a dormer wall above the full upper floor (both options allow the roof space to be used for two rooms; with the dormer, these rooms are very large and could even accommodate an attic instead of bunk beds)
- 50-degree roof pitch (for solar energy efficiency in winter)
- The basement should be designed to eventually allow for a small separate living unit
- Both bathrooms should have a standing toilet or urinal
- We definitely want a windbreak/entry vestibule
- The terrace should be raised with fill
- Underfloor heating with geothermal energy
- Solar energy planned for the future
We have already developed a fairly comfortable floor plan with our chosen architect. Our biggest concern is accidentally planning a wall or something else 5 cm (2 inches) too far to the left or right and then being unable to fit our furniture. I would appreciate it if you would be interested in looking over the current design and giving feedback.
ypg schrieb:
Take a look! Then find the mistake! ? I don’t see any mistake?First of all, your window placement doesn’t work because you need beams on the ground floor. These have to be supported somewhere on the exterior wall, but you have windows everywhere there...
Secondly, take a look here: this layout is much more practical, as it avoids creating a bottleneck inside the house or an installation that could be obstructive in the middle.
Secondly, take a look here: this layout is much more practical, as it avoids creating a bottleneck inside the house or an installation that could be obstructive in the middle.
kbt09 schrieb:
Is there actually a site plan available somewhere? At least it's not in the first post. Why are the 9x9 m dimensions set with 42/49 cm thick walls?Unfortunately, the first post can no longer be edited here. That’s a shame, otherwise I would have liked to add or change some things. I have attached the site plan several times in the meantime. Here it is again as an attachment. No one here has been able to understand the 9x9 so far. For us, it’s fixed. Just like the 42.5 cm (17 inches) bricks. If we hit the lottery, there’ll be 49 cm (19 inches) and then, of course, 13 cm (5 inches) more.
ypg schrieb:
For one, your window placements don’t work because you need beams on the ground floor. They have to be supported somewhere on the exterior wall. But you have windows there everywhere...I have no clue about that. I would leave that to the architect. But surely even he might have overlooked something at this stage. Which beams exactly do you mean so I can ask? Maybe this issue was resolved with the new changes?! ypg schrieb:
Secondly, take a look here: this layout is much more practical since it avoids creating a bottleneck inside the house, or an installation that could be obstructive in the middle.That wasn’t an option for us so far because we really wanted a physically separated cloakroom/vestibule. It is currently developing in a way that it doesn’t have to be “thermally separated” (so no door needed), and I am seriously considering whether a separation is necessary at all, or if your design would be fine for us. The most important thing was always that we don’t have to walk through the “shoe storage area.” And that seems to be ensured in your design, especially if the shoe cabinet stays put. Our architect sent the revised drafts today. I redrew them. Apart from the bedroom being “about 10–30 cm (4–12 inches) too narrow” and the entrance area (which is now, as we wanted, open but still very twisty and small), I like it. In the last draft, the roof was too low, too. Now we actually have nearly 50 cm (20 inches) more headroom and shifted the 1 and 2 meter (3.3 and 6.6 feet) lines each by 40.7 cm (16 inches) outward. This adds a lot of usable space in the attic.
Edit: Explanation about the stairs:
He added one more step everywhere, so the stairs are shallower. However, in the basement, he kept the tread very short and added the bottom step there, so the stairs didn’t have to turn at the top. But this does not comply with safety regulations, and the stride length is too short. So basically, it’s a shallow staircase mainly for children. I’m not sure if it should be shortened by one step again? The other stairs seem quite okay, in my opinion.
| Starting Level | Height | Length | Steps | Riser Height | Width | Stride Rule (60/63–65\66) | Safety Rule (45/46\47) | Comfort Rule (12) | Angle (30°) |
| Basement | 277.5 | 390 | 16 | 17.3438 | 26 | 60.6875 | 43.34375 | 8.65625 | 33.70595654 |
| Ground Floor | 281.5 | 420 | 16 | 17.5938 | 28 | 63.1875 | 45.59375 | 10.40625 | 32.14312698 |
| Upper Floor | 268.5 | 393.4 | 15 | 17.9 | 28.1 | 63.9 | 46 | 10.2 | 32.49757156 |
EDIT2: We still need space for a urinal in the ground floor toilet (maybe ypg’s suggestion could help here) and space for a cabinet in the bathroom.
Revised proposal for the hallway from #108 with adjusted measurements:
If necessary, swap the WC and the 50cm (20 inch) cabinet. I would prefer it this way, but no one can override your self-imposed (peculiar) rules.
For the new shoe storage issue, it might be possible to add a small entrance area or vestibule with a shoe cabinet as a subordinate structure in front of the main entrance. You would need to check the specific regulations regarding "subordinate structures" in your local municipality.
If necessary, swap the WC and the 50cm (20 inch) cabinet. I would prefer it this way, but no one can override your self-imposed (peculiar) rules.
For the new shoe storage issue, it might be possible to add a small entrance area or vestibule with a shoe cabinet as a subordinate structure in front of the main entrance. You would need to check the specific regulations regarding "subordinate structures" in your local municipality.
Similar topics