ᐅ Single-family home, approximately 160 m², Bauhaus style; first design draft based on our requirements

Created on: 23 Aug 2019 22:03

Hello everyone,

we've been looking forward to this for a long time, and now we can finally share our first draft floor plan/design for discussion. We’re very curious to hear your feedback.
Those of you who have seen my thread before (https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/efh-Bauhausstil-Wohnfläche-180m-mit-Doppelgarage.31853/) know what to expect, and here comes the gem.

Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 530m² (about 5,700 sq ft)
Slope: No
Site coverage ratio (Grundflächenzahl): see screenshot
Floor area ratio (Geschossflächenzahl): see screenshot
Building envelope, building line, and boundaries: see screenshot
Edge development: see screenshot
Number of parking spaces: double garage
Number of floors: 2
Roof style: flat roof
Architectural style: Bauhaus
Orientation
Maximum height/limitations
Other requirements

The green highlighted area represents our plot => Parcel 8479

Cadastral map with pink parcels LP II, blue outlines, green line with marker.

Schematic representation of building use, site coverage ratio, WA and BauNVO references.

Schematic floor plan of a house with room layout and labels WA 1 2 WE

Homeowner Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: Bauhaus style, flat roof
Basement, floors: Basement yes, ground floor, upper floor
Number of residents, ages: 3 people, potentially 4: 33, 30, 2 years old
Space requirements on ground and upper floors: Initially planned 180 m² (about 1,940 sq ft) on two stories, now reduced to 160 m² (about 1,720 sq ft) after feedback, with the ground floor slightly larger than the upper floor, around 75–85 m² (810–915 sq ft)
Office: Family use or home office? Yes, in the basement (guest room <-> office)
Overnight guests per year: Hard to say, probably about 10 times per year with 2–5 guests each time
Open or closed architecture: Rather open
Conservative or modern construction: Rather modern
Open kitchen, cooking island: Island
Number of dining spaces: 1
Fireplace: Yes
Music/sound system wall: Our soundbar is sufficient
Balcony, roof terrace: Maybe, undecided (Architect’s comment: How often do you really go out for a beer on the balcony/roof terrace instead of the nice terrace on the ground floor?)
Garage, carport: Double garage, possibly single garage with carport
Kitchen garden, greenhouse: Small but nice (a few tomatoes, cucumbers, zucchinis…)

House Design
Planning by: Architect

What do you particularly like? Why? We like the architecture with the two offset rectangles, though we wonder if the extra cost (no price estimate yet) justifies this. We believe it is structurally more challenging than a simple "cube."
What don’t you like? Why? The size of the bedroom/walk-in closet/children’s room. It feels like the bedroom is missing 2–5 m² (about 20–55 sq ft), as is the second children’s room.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: The initial draft was around 550,000 EUR
Personal price limit for the house, including fixtures: 620,000 EUR
Preferred heating technology: Indifferent, but tendency toward heat pump.

If you had to give up something, which details/finishes
- You can give up: the current shape (nice but a cube would also do)
- You cannot give up: space

Why is the design the way it is now? For example:
Standard design from the planner? This is the second design resulting from last week’s discussion with us, and we find it very successful.
Which wishes were implemented by the architect? Absolutely, plus the idea he had to move the kitchen during development. The guest room has now moved to the basement, allowing more space on the ground floor (beforehand, it felt quite cramped and “squeezed”).
What makes it especially good or bad in your opinion? The architecture

...and now I’ll leave you alone with our house

Ground floor plan of a house with terrace, garden with trees and garage

Floor plan of a residential house with double garage, open living/kitchen area, terrace, and staircase.

Floor plan of a house: terrace, living-dining area with kitchen, hallway, vestibule, wardrobe, WC/shower.

Upper floor plan:

Floor plan of an upper floor: hallway, bathroom, bedroom, child 1, child 2, walk-in closet

Basement:

Site plan of a plot with parcels, building areas and road layout

Ippebson12 Sep 2019 20:28

#163

To be honest, I can’t understand how someone can give up so quickly after such a short time. It took us 4 weeks before revisions were reflected in new sketches. To me, it all seems a bit rushed, sorry.

Good luck

guckuck212 Sep 2019 20:29

#164

Notstrom schrieb:

...or just the quick money ... to clarify once again: The whole process started on August 14th...

You guys can still argue about that.

I just find it not very surprising that after the termination, he doesn’t feel like continuing with you. He has every right to do so, just like you, who ended the commitment (and then wanted to resume it). It takes two to tango.

apokolok schrieb:

Well, it has little to do with dignity.

Of course, you’re not a beggar. First, the client leaves the room satisfied with a design – that’s how the original poster came here – then he turns 180 degrees and everything is bad. Then the contract is terminated, then he comes back. At some point, enough is enough. You don’t have to accept everything, even as a service provider.

apokolok schrieb:

Poor performance and then charging the full amount...

That’s not exactly easy to judge from a remote diagnosis, is it?

Notstrom12 Sep 2019 20:31

#165

guckuck2 schrieb:

You guys can still argue about that.

I just find it hardly surprising that after the termination, he no longer wants to continue working with you. He absolutely has the right to do so, just like you do if you end the engagement (and then wanted to resume). It takes two, after all.

Of course, no one is a beggar. First, the client leaves satisfied with a draft – that’s how the original poster got involved here – then he turns 180 degrees and everything is bad. Then the contract is terminated, and then he comes back again. At some point, enough is enough. You don’t have to go along with everything, even as a service provider.

It’s not exactly easy to assess this remotely, is it?

Begging? Wait a second, that’s actually the scary part—there were flaws that I, as a layperson, didn’t see and came away "satisfied." Ever thought about that?

Baufie12 Sep 2019 21:19

#166

Notstrom schrieb:

Begging? No, wait a moment, that’s actually the scary part—there were bugs that I, as a layperson, didn’t notice and was therefore "satisfied" with. Have you ever thought about that?

What kind of bugs were they that couldn’t be fixed?

Notstrom12 Sep 2019 21:24

#167

Baufie schrieb:

Which bugs were those that couldn’t be resolved?

Bugs I didn’t notice, where the expectation was that he would spot them before they even appeared.

Besides, it’s important to consider that the list of potential issues was always quite full, and he was already disappointed that we had abandoned the cube design and therefore his concept...

ypg12 Sep 2019 22:31

#168

Notstrom schrieb:

We shared our opinion with him and expressed disappointment that he seemed to prioritize his concept over our wishes and requirements. We also offered to start over from scratch. He showed no interest and said he no longer wanted to work with us.

kaho674 schrieb:

And you already read that the original poster offered to start over and the architect declined?

apokolok schrieb:

This kind of attitude from the architect really gives the whole situation a sour taste now,

apokolok schrieb:

Now playing the offended artist and still wanting to charge full price... no, that just doesn’t fit.

No! First, the client canceled the contract, then the invoice was sent. After that came the call expressing disappointment... I wouldn’t want to work for the client again either. He canceled... If you’re “disappointed” or better said, have different expectations, you say so before canceling and then try to find a solution.

apokolok schrieb:

Of course, we only know the situation from one side,

Exactly. And the kind original poster deserves sympathy.

Notstrom schrieb:

There were bugs in it that I, as a layperson, didn’t see.

Which ones? No design is perfect the first time. That applies to second and third drafts as well. Designing a house is always a process.

I really find it hard to believe he is slow or unprofessional. Don’t know either.

Notstrom schrieb:

We initially planned for 180 square meters (1,940 sq ft) on two floors, but reduced it to 160 square meters (1,720 sq ft), partly based on feedback here.

Because of the forum...

Notstrom schrieb:

Roof terrace: Maybe, still undecided (Architect: How often do you really go get your beer and go out onto the balcony/roof terrace instead of the nice terrace on the ground floor?)

He was right there.

Notstrom schrieb:

Which wishes did the architect implement? Absolutely plus, additionally his idea to relocate the kitchen, which came to him during the design process.

That applies here too. Then came the crowd, and then this:

Notstrom schrieb:

Since the outcome is quite sobering for the architect and us: Can you recommend floor plans or houses in Bauhaus design that you say: “Wow! That is benchmark”?

Some more lengthy posts from other users, then this:

Notstrom schrieb:

We will tell the architect that we want to approach the interior layout starting from the house design and not the other way around.

If you really said that to him, it explains his resentment.

When offering a service to a client, you are chosen based on your portfolio. As a service provider, you combine your style with the client’s wishes. The same applies to architects.
I just came across your email to the architect.
Based on that, the new design would probably look like it does/would look from any architect.
In your mail, you listed all criticism points that the community gave you. Are these the so-called “bugs” for you now?
I’m really curious what would happen if the community tore apart the version that would be perfect for you.

ᐅ Single-family home, approximately 160 m², Bauhaus style; first design draft based on our requirements

Reaktionen