ᐅ Single-family Home with Double Garage on a Sloped Site – Design Optimization
Created on: 31 Mar 2021 14:39
S
StefanNDHello,
I have been a silent reader here for quite some time. After a long planning phase, we have now received our design for a single-family house. Due to the sloping site, the project keeps causing us headaches (additional costs due to a full basement, issues with garage construction at the property boundary). We are not completely unhappy with the design, but in our opinion, the house has become too large. We are now looking for ways to optimize the floor plan sensibly so as not to further strain our budget.
The window arrangement, facade design, and window positioning are not at all final yet, as we do not like them in the current form.
We are also considering changing from three stories to a floor plan with a basement only (the second dwelling unit would then be dropped). However, I am still not quite comfortable with this option and do not know if the savings (minus the loss of the second KfW subsidy) would still be significant.
I am very much looking forward to your opinions on the plan.
Development plan/restrictions
Plot size: 675 m2 (approx. 7,266 sq ft); about 27 m (89 ft) wide on the street side, 25 m (82 ft) deep
Slope: yes, sloping about 3.5 m (11 ft) over 25 m (82 ft) to the southwest, and slightly rising on the street side to the east
Site coverage ratio (Grundflächenzahl): 0.3
Floor area ratio (Geschossflächenzahl): 0.4
Building setback: 3 meters (10 ft) to the street, 10 meters (33 ft) to the boundary in the southwest (5 m (16 ft) of which is local edge landscaping)
Adjacent buildings: none
Number of parking spaces: 2
Maximum number of stories: 2
Roof type: gable roof
Architectural style: modern
Orientation: ridge running east-west
Maximum heights/limits: wall height 6.5 m (21 ft), ridge height 9 m (30 ft)
Other requirements: 5 m (16 ft) green strip along the southwestern property boundary, infiltration of rainwater, but otherwise nothing special
Homeowner requirements
Architectural style, roof form, building type: modern, gable roof at 18° (this will still be changed in the plan)
Basement, number of floors: 2 full floors plus basement
Number of occupants, age: 2 adults, eventually 2 children
Space requirements on the ground floor: cloakroom, shower toilet, office/guest room, kitchen, living-dining room
Space requirements on the upper floor: 2 children’s rooms, master bedroom, dressing rooms, master bathroom, optional: children’s bathroom / separate toilet
Office use: regular home office 1-4 days per week
Overnight guests per year: regular (large, scattered family)
Open or closed layout: open
Conservative or modern architecture: modern construction with open design, building envelope rather classic with a low-pitched gable roof
Open kitchen, kitchen island: open kitchen with work island
Number of dining seats: usually 4-6
Fireplace: yes
Media wall for TV: yes
Balcony, roof terrace: balcony for the children
Garage, carport: double garage
Utility garden, greenhouse: garden with a small edible section (herbs in the terrace beds, etc.)
Other wishes/special features/daily routine, including reasons why particular aspects are preferred or not:
- Children’s bathroom not an absolute must
- Large cloakroom
- Spacious open living and dining area
- Possibly open attic
House design
Who created the design:
- draftsperson
What do you particularly like?
Open and spacious; many of our wishes have been considered. We wanted to keep the main building form elongated to preserve as much garden as possible (5 m (16 ft) lost at the front due to local edge landscaping).
What don’t you like? Why?
The three rooms on the south side upstairs feel a bit cramped; generally, we would like to reduce the size of the house somewhat, but we lack ideas here.
Cost estimate according to architect/designer: approx. 600,000
Personal budget limit for the house, including fixtures and fittings: very difficult to say
Preferred heating system: gas planned due to existing connection, possibly also a heat pump or a hybrid of both
If you had to give up something, which details or expansions would you consider?
- Children’s bathroom
- Staircase form (spiral staircase not desired), size in general as there is a lot of space in the basement due to the slope (garage must also be underpinned)
Why is the design as it is now? E.g.
We have been dealing with the topic for a long time and have already planned many different variants. I (the builder) like a straight staircase, but my partner does not want it directly in the living area. The compromise is this variant, but we are not sure if a different staircase type (e.g., a stair with a landing) would lead to a better design.
Because of the location on the edge of the village and the unobstructed view to the southwest, our planner placed the master bedroom along with the children’s rooms on one side upstairs. We fear this might be a bit tight and that a lot of space on this floor is wasted.
Since we do not want to build the terrace as a balcony structure, most of it will be filled in. The part above the second dwelling unit might then be extended by a frame. Because we lose a lot of garden area due to this filling, we opted for a narrower floor plan.
One big problem for a long time was the boundary construction of the garage. Here, we have now joined forces with the neighbor, who is attaching his garage to ours. This gives us a straight driveway and no issues with wall height.
What is the most important/basic question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
The house seems a bit too large compared to the room sizes. Can the floor plan be optimized? Are we wasting space?
Is the room arrangement upstairs sensible, or could the space be used better/more spaciously?
Should we maybe plan very differently because of the slope and use the basement as living space to save a whole story?
I have been a silent reader here for quite some time. After a long planning phase, we have now received our design for a single-family house. Due to the sloping site, the project keeps causing us headaches (additional costs due to a full basement, issues with garage construction at the property boundary). We are not completely unhappy with the design, but in our opinion, the house has become too large. We are now looking for ways to optimize the floor plan sensibly so as not to further strain our budget.
The window arrangement, facade design, and window positioning are not at all final yet, as we do not like them in the current form.
We are also considering changing from three stories to a floor plan with a basement only (the second dwelling unit would then be dropped). However, I am still not quite comfortable with this option and do not know if the savings (minus the loss of the second KfW subsidy) would still be significant.
I am very much looking forward to your opinions on the plan.
Development plan/restrictions
Plot size: 675 m2 (approx. 7,266 sq ft); about 27 m (89 ft) wide on the street side, 25 m (82 ft) deep
Slope: yes, sloping about 3.5 m (11 ft) over 25 m (82 ft) to the southwest, and slightly rising on the street side to the east
Site coverage ratio (Grundflächenzahl): 0.3
Floor area ratio (Geschossflächenzahl): 0.4
Building setback: 3 meters (10 ft) to the street, 10 meters (33 ft) to the boundary in the southwest (5 m (16 ft) of which is local edge landscaping)
Adjacent buildings: none
Number of parking spaces: 2
Maximum number of stories: 2
Roof type: gable roof
Architectural style: modern
Orientation: ridge running east-west
Maximum heights/limits: wall height 6.5 m (21 ft), ridge height 9 m (30 ft)
Other requirements: 5 m (16 ft) green strip along the southwestern property boundary, infiltration of rainwater, but otherwise nothing special
Homeowner requirements
Architectural style, roof form, building type: modern, gable roof at 18° (this will still be changed in the plan)
Basement, number of floors: 2 full floors plus basement
Number of occupants, age: 2 adults, eventually 2 children
Space requirements on the ground floor: cloakroom, shower toilet, office/guest room, kitchen, living-dining room
Space requirements on the upper floor: 2 children’s rooms, master bedroom, dressing rooms, master bathroom, optional: children’s bathroom / separate toilet
Office use: regular home office 1-4 days per week
Overnight guests per year: regular (large, scattered family)
Open or closed layout: open
Conservative or modern architecture: modern construction with open design, building envelope rather classic with a low-pitched gable roof
Open kitchen, kitchen island: open kitchen with work island
Number of dining seats: usually 4-6
Fireplace: yes
Media wall for TV: yes
Balcony, roof terrace: balcony for the children
Garage, carport: double garage
Utility garden, greenhouse: garden with a small edible section (herbs in the terrace beds, etc.)
Other wishes/special features/daily routine, including reasons why particular aspects are preferred or not:
- Children’s bathroom not an absolute must
- Large cloakroom
- Spacious open living and dining area
- Possibly open attic
House design
Who created the design:
- draftsperson
What do you particularly like?
Open and spacious; many of our wishes have been considered. We wanted to keep the main building form elongated to preserve as much garden as possible (5 m (16 ft) lost at the front due to local edge landscaping).
What don’t you like? Why?
The three rooms on the south side upstairs feel a bit cramped; generally, we would like to reduce the size of the house somewhat, but we lack ideas here.
Cost estimate according to architect/designer: approx. 600,000
Personal budget limit for the house, including fixtures and fittings: very difficult to say
Preferred heating system: gas planned due to existing connection, possibly also a heat pump or a hybrid of both
If you had to give up something, which details or expansions would you consider?
- Children’s bathroom
- Staircase form (spiral staircase not desired), size in general as there is a lot of space in the basement due to the slope (garage must also be underpinned)
Why is the design as it is now? E.g.
We have been dealing with the topic for a long time and have already planned many different variants. I (the builder) like a straight staircase, but my partner does not want it directly in the living area. The compromise is this variant, but we are not sure if a different staircase type (e.g., a stair with a landing) would lead to a better design.
Because of the location on the edge of the village and the unobstructed view to the southwest, our planner placed the master bedroom along with the children’s rooms on one side upstairs. We fear this might be a bit tight and that a lot of space on this floor is wasted.
Since we do not want to build the terrace as a balcony structure, most of it will be filled in. The part above the second dwelling unit might then be extended by a frame. Because we lose a lot of garden area due to this filling, we opted for a narrower floor plan.
One big problem for a long time was the boundary construction of the garage. Here, we have now joined forces with the neighbor, who is attaching his garage to ours. This gives us a straight driveway and no issues with wall height.
What is the most important/basic question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
The house seems a bit too large compared to the room sizes. Can the floor plan be optimized? Are we wasting space?
Is the room arrangement upstairs sensible, or could the space be used better/more spaciously?
Should we maybe plan very differently because of the slope and use the basement as living space to save a whole story?
A very similar house was discussed here about three weeks ago. It looks almost exactly the same, except the basement apartment there is intended to be used as a medical practice.
I don't think it feels cramped. It isn’t—only the large hallway, due to the staircase, takes up a lot of space. However, I would also mention that the view from the children’s rooms is somewhat overrated. In this case, the orientation works well.
What do you mean by spiral staircase? A spiral staircase is round...
That’s very likely!
... you could skip the filling in... having one less story saves a lot on the budget.
More living space always costs more money. You can’t make up for that with a subsidy. An additional 100 square meters cost around 200,000€, especially with finishes like plumbing, technical installations, and kitchen! It is what it is! I would plan the basement nicely as a living area with direct access (without expensive fill) and have the sleeping area on the upper floor. Then possibly add 5–10 square meters on each level. You avoid all problems and also the hassle that comes with living so close to a tenant, practically next door in the garden.
StefanND schrieb:
On the upper floor, the three rooms on the south side feel a bit cramped. We would also like to make the house generally smaller, but we are lacking ideas.
I don't think it feels cramped. It isn’t—only the large hallway, due to the staircase, takes up a lot of space. However, I would also mention that the view from the children’s rooms is somewhat overrated. In this case, the orientation works well.
StefanND schrieb:
A spiral staircase is not desired),
What do you mean by spiral staircase? A spiral staircase is round...
StefanND schrieb:
and use the basement as living space to save an entire floor?
That’s very likely!
StefanND schrieb:
Since we lose a lot of garden area due to filling in, we decided on a narrower floor plan.
... you could skip the filling in... having one less story saves a lot on the budget.
StefanND schrieb:
The second dwelling unit would then be gone). At the moment, I can’t quite get used to that or know whether the savings (minus the loss of the second KfW subsidy) would still be that high.
More living space always costs more money. You can’t make up for that with a subsidy. An additional 100 square meters cost around 200,000€, especially with finishes like plumbing, technical installations, and kitchen! It is what it is! I would plan the basement nicely as a living area with direct access (without expensive fill) and have the sleeping area on the upper floor. Then possibly add 5–10 square meters on each level. You avoid all problems and also the hassle that comes with living so close to a tenant, practically next door in the garden.
askforafriend31 Mar 2021 22:54I honestly think it’s pretty good overall! You only save space if the straight staircase can be removed – that requires at least 12-13 meters (39-43 feet), I think. Is the 600k just for the house or does it exclude additional construction-related costs, etc.?
ypg schrieb:
A similar house was discussed here about 3 weeks ago. It looks almost exactly the same, except the granny flat in the basement is designed as a practice there. Haha, it really looks like https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/entwurf-efh-in-hanglage-mit-einliegerwohnung-und-doppelgarage.38480/ by a significantly younger architect.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
I am in favor of designing the basement as a living area and reducing the number of floors by one
- saves more costs than any subsidy could provide
- eliminates the multi-family house appearance
- creates a unified garden and living space without a small terrace that was filled at great expense.
Why is the garage located on the west side and not the east?
What is the terrain slope?
- saves more costs than any subsidy could provide
- eliminates the multi-family house appearance
- creates a unified garden and living space without a small terrace that was filled at great expense.
Why is the garage located on the west side and not the east?
What is the terrain slope?
I always consider it a design mistake when the living room is planned on the south side next to the terrace. There is no real connection between sitting outside and the living room. Also, when watching TV, sunlight glare is just a disturbance. Therefore, the kitchen should be placed exactly where the living room is currently planned. Drinks and barbecue supplies are rarely stored in the TV cabinet.
Similar topics