ᐅ Single-family house with a recessed upper floor, southwest-facing, located in Bonn
Created on: 5 Oct 2020 20:40
B
Benrath
Hello everyone,
we have purchased one of three plots that were divided from a larger property and still need to be developed. Access is via a private road, and all three owners share the traffic area equally. The plot is very well connected for us, located centrally in Bonn, and is perhaps a bit larger than we actually needed. However, it’s not like there are always free plots available in a similar location.
Because there was a lengthy legal dispute between the seller and the neighbors beforehand, we can only build a partial recessed upper floor to a limited extent. Probably for this reason, the plot was mainly interesting for private buyers. An accessory apartment is not possible, and we don’t want one anyway.
Up until now, the planning was done from scratch without considering costs or practical aspects, at least from our side. The architect apparently enjoys drawing, which is understandable at this stage and has a certain artistic approach. We are generally open to all suggestions and ideas on what could be done differently, especially where costs might be saved easily.
Our next step will be to conclude an architect contract for service phases 1 to 5 plus general contractor / main contractor.
Development plan/restrictions
Plot size: >800sqm (8600 sq ft), no slope, building envelope etc. See plan.
Parking spaces: 1 on traffic area and 1 garage
Number of storeys: Only 1 full storey plus a recessed upper floor
Roof style: Flat roof; architectural style: rather Bauhaus
Orientation: Front of the house faces southwest
Maximum height/limits: 7–8m (23–26 ft)
Owners’ requirements
We basically have no specific style requirements. A flat roof results partly from the recessed upper floor and height restrictions, which probably don’t allow a pitched roof.
We want a basement with excavation and two daylight rooms (this was more the architect’s idea). Currently, there are three of us, possibly four in the future. Early 30s and a baby.
We had planned for just over 100sqm (1076 sq ft) on the ground floor and about 75% of that upstairs. Currently, it’s roughly 230sqm (2475 sq ft) ground floor and upper floor combined plus terraces, etc., and the basement.
Office: occasional use, not very important.
Number of overnight guests per year: unknown, but a guest room is planned
Open kitchen, kitchen island: We definitely want a separate kitchen area and like the suggestion of an extended island
Number of dining seats: 4 in the kitchen, more like 8 in the dining room
Fireplace: Not very important, probably no.
Music/surround sound system: 5.1 system around the TV
Balcony, roof terrace: Terrace is a must, balcony above the kitchen results from the recessed floor
Garage, carport: The garage width of 4.5m (15 ft) is unusual and probably makes it more expensive.
House design by the architect
What do we particularly like? Why? Good use of the sunny side, and otherwise all our wishes have been taken into account.
Upper floor: 3 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms. Master bedroom with en-suite bathroom and walk-in closet.
What don’t we like? Why? I could imagine a nicer staircase, perhaps a longer, more open design. Overall, the hallway feels a bit large.
The upper-floor terrace seems somewhat oversized. We are wondering if the overhang casts too much shade on the ground floor.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: with general contractor and all additional costs >900,000€ (over 900,000 euros)
Personal budget limit for the house, including fittings: rather below that.
Preferred heating technology: no opinion so far
Why does the design look like it does?
For example:
There was an initial meeting with the architect during which our wishes were noted.
Ground floor: separated kitchen, combined living/dining area. Another separate room as office/guest room (and possibly bedroom if needed).
Passage from the garage to the house, possibly as a utility room.
Upper floor: 3 rooms plus 2 bathrooms, including one en-suite.
First draft at the second meeting, and at the third meeting this final design was presented.
we have purchased one of three plots that were divided from a larger property and still need to be developed. Access is via a private road, and all three owners share the traffic area equally. The plot is very well connected for us, located centrally in Bonn, and is perhaps a bit larger than we actually needed. However, it’s not like there are always free plots available in a similar location.
Because there was a lengthy legal dispute between the seller and the neighbors beforehand, we can only build a partial recessed upper floor to a limited extent. Probably for this reason, the plot was mainly interesting for private buyers. An accessory apartment is not possible, and we don’t want one anyway.
Up until now, the planning was done from scratch without considering costs or practical aspects, at least from our side. The architect apparently enjoys drawing, which is understandable at this stage and has a certain artistic approach. We are generally open to all suggestions and ideas on what could be done differently, especially where costs might be saved easily.
Our next step will be to conclude an architect contract for service phases 1 to 5 plus general contractor / main contractor.
Development plan/restrictions
Plot size: >800sqm (8600 sq ft), no slope, building envelope etc. See plan.
Parking spaces: 1 on traffic area and 1 garage
Number of storeys: Only 1 full storey plus a recessed upper floor
Roof style: Flat roof; architectural style: rather Bauhaus
Orientation: Front of the house faces southwest
Maximum height/limits: 7–8m (23–26 ft)
Owners’ requirements
We basically have no specific style requirements. A flat roof results partly from the recessed upper floor and height restrictions, which probably don’t allow a pitched roof.
We want a basement with excavation and two daylight rooms (this was more the architect’s idea). Currently, there are three of us, possibly four in the future. Early 30s and a baby.
We had planned for just over 100sqm (1076 sq ft) on the ground floor and about 75% of that upstairs. Currently, it’s roughly 230sqm (2475 sq ft) ground floor and upper floor combined plus terraces, etc., and the basement.
Office: occasional use, not very important.
Number of overnight guests per year: unknown, but a guest room is planned
Open kitchen, kitchen island: We definitely want a separate kitchen area and like the suggestion of an extended island
Number of dining seats: 4 in the kitchen, more like 8 in the dining room
Fireplace: Not very important, probably no.
Music/surround sound system: 5.1 system around the TV
Balcony, roof terrace: Terrace is a must, balcony above the kitchen results from the recessed floor
Garage, carport: The garage width of 4.5m (15 ft) is unusual and probably makes it more expensive.
House design by the architect
What do we particularly like? Why? Good use of the sunny side, and otherwise all our wishes have been taken into account.
Upper floor: 3 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms. Master bedroom with en-suite bathroom and walk-in closet.
What don’t we like? Why? I could imagine a nicer staircase, perhaps a longer, more open design. Overall, the hallway feels a bit large.
The upper-floor terrace seems somewhat oversized. We are wondering if the overhang casts too much shade on the ground floor.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: with general contractor and all additional costs >900,000€ (over 900,000 euros)
Personal budget limit for the house, including fittings: rather below that.
Preferred heating technology: no opinion so far
Why does the design look like it does?
For example:
There was an initial meeting with the architect during which our wishes were noted.
Ground floor: separated kitchen, combined living/dining area. Another separate room as office/guest room (and possibly bedroom if needed).
Passage from the garage to the house, possibly as a utility room.
Upper floor: 3 rooms plus 2 bathrooms, including one en-suite.
First draft at the second meeting, and at the third meeting this final design was presented.
pagoni2020 schrieb:
A "standard" grand piano already measures around 160x160cm (63x63 inches), without the bench and the surrounding open space. However, it would have the advantage that you could also place the hot dumplings or the beer keg there when guests come.If you want to order the pianist afterward, yes. By the way, a grand piano is also quite an acoustic diva – just as a side note regarding the idea of a 4 sqm (43 sq ft) opening to create a perceived connection between the two floors:Benrath schrieb:
I’m rather thinking about whether it would be possible to create a sightline between the upper floor and the ground floor by simply leaving an approximately 2x2m (6.5x6.5 ft) corner open where the dressing room is now.https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
No, not at all over the top. It’s a small baby grand piano, so it’s not that big. The table and couch corner are currently just placeholders. Overall, though, it’s a good idea to give more concrete thought to the size and placement of furniture at least on the ground floor. Also in the kitchen. On the other hand, we still have a lot of freedom to adapt to the room, and with the size, quite a lot is possible.
What do you mean by conveying the entrance to the central dining table? I’m imagining the dining table positioned diagonally so it fits well with the piano. We’re planning more for an L-shaped sofa and an additional armchair/chair.
In my opinion, many people only evaluate the floor plan and, naturally due to lack of background information, question everything without knowing the surrounding context. That’s okay, but it feels like none of my explanations are accepted or even considered.
For example, the garage doesn’t make sense anywhere else on the property because it’s located at the north end where the street runs. Otherwise, I would have to place the garage in the garden. By the way, this also determines the entrance and staircase location. Moving the staircase to the north doesn’t help my space planning much and wouldn’t create a visual connection to the floor below.
If I could, I would prefer to build only 210–220 m² (2,260–2,370 sq ft) and save space downstairs, but the 100 m² (1,076 sq ft) on the upper floor that result from our requirements (2 children’s rooms, kids’ bathroom, parents’ areas: bathroom, dressing room, bedroom) unfortunately require 150 m² (1,615 sq ft) on the ground floor due to the setback floor and 66% regulation from the old building code. That’s why, for example, the somewhat oversized “all-purpose room” and the satellite kitchen.
With my suggestion of the lens as the connection between upper and ground floors, the hallway would gain a bit and be somewhat brighter and more spacious, including the corridor to the office/guest room.
If the office was really just an office and not also a guest room, I could see some merit in the suggestion to connect it via the living room. Even if I make the bathroom larger, it would then have to be a pass-through bathroom to the guest room, which I find a bit strange. With the lens, the dressing room would become smaller and just a passageway to the parent bathroom, and the bedroom would only be accessible through the bathroom. Does anyone else have a setup like this? Four-meter (13 ft) wardrobes and a sideboard would probably be enough.
I would be willing to make the living room a bit smaller to gain some hallway space, but then the problem between the living room and kitchen becomes even worse. And the desire for a separate kitchen is simply there. We currently have it like this and we’re happy with it. I will reconsider the question of whether you see straight into the living room from the entrance. On the other hand, the house is on a private road and the door can also be closed.
By the way, I’m happy to be convinced by other floor plans if you have any 🙂
What do you mean by conveying the entrance to the central dining table? I’m imagining the dining table positioned diagonally so it fits well with the piano. We’re planning more for an L-shaped sofa and an additional armchair/chair.
In my opinion, many people only evaluate the floor plan and, naturally due to lack of background information, question everything without knowing the surrounding context. That’s okay, but it feels like none of my explanations are accepted or even considered.
For example, the garage doesn’t make sense anywhere else on the property because it’s located at the north end where the street runs. Otherwise, I would have to place the garage in the garden. By the way, this also determines the entrance and staircase location. Moving the staircase to the north doesn’t help my space planning much and wouldn’t create a visual connection to the floor below.
If I could, I would prefer to build only 210–220 m² (2,260–2,370 sq ft) and save space downstairs, but the 100 m² (1,076 sq ft) on the upper floor that result from our requirements (2 children’s rooms, kids’ bathroom, parents’ areas: bathroom, dressing room, bedroom) unfortunately require 150 m² (1,615 sq ft) on the ground floor due to the setback floor and 66% regulation from the old building code. That’s why, for example, the somewhat oversized “all-purpose room” and the satellite kitchen.
With my suggestion of the lens as the connection between upper and ground floors, the hallway would gain a bit and be somewhat brighter and more spacious, including the corridor to the office/guest room.
If the office was really just an office and not also a guest room, I could see some merit in the suggestion to connect it via the living room. Even if I make the bathroom larger, it would then have to be a pass-through bathroom to the guest room, which I find a bit strange. With the lens, the dressing room would become smaller and just a passageway to the parent bathroom, and the bedroom would only be accessible through the bathroom. Does anyone else have a setup like this? Four-meter (13 ft) wardrobes and a sideboard would probably be enough.
I would be willing to make the living room a bit smaller to gain some hallway space, but then the problem between the living room and kitchen becomes even worse. And the desire for a separate kitchen is simply there. We currently have it like this and we’re happy with it. I will reconsider the question of whether you see straight into the living room from the entrance. On the other hand, the house is on a private road and the door can also be closed.
By the way, I’m happy to be convinced by other floor plans if you have any 🙂
11ant schrieb:
If you want to order the voice after that, yes. By the way, a grand piano is also acoustically a diva – just as a side note regarding the idea of a 4sqm (43ft²) peephole for a perceived connection between the two floors:What do you mean by “just as a side note” regarding the idea of a peephole?
Würfel* schrieb:
You could also consider reversing the direction of the stairs, then the ground floor could stay as it is and upstairs it could look like this. You’d have a great bright and spacious walk-in closet where you could even iron. And the hallway wouldn’t be so cramped...
That has a certain appeal, hmm.
Benrath schrieb:
Otherwise, the garage wouldn’t make sense anywhere else on the property, Actually, if I look at the entire property (and remember my earlier points at the very beginning of the discussion), a shared underground parking garage seems almost obvious.
Benrath schrieb:
If I could, I would also prefer to build only 210-220sqm (2255-2368 sq ft) and save on the lower floor, but the 100sqm (1076 sq ft) upstairs required by our needs (2 children’s bedrooms, children’s bathroom, parents’ area including bathroom, dressing room, bedroom) unfortunately mandate 150sqm (1615 sq ft) on the ground floor because of the stepped storey regulation and 66% according to the old building code. That explains, for example, the somewhat oversized “family room” and the satellite kitchen. You couldn’t better demonstrate an architect’s inability than with a house that, supposedly for reasons of avoiding a full storey, has to be unnecessarily large— not even a redundant utility room can help in that regard ;-)
Benrath schrieb:
By the way, what about the idea of a peephole? Well, it’s more of a drawback acoustically than a benefit.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
11ant schrieb:
Yes. When I look at the entire property (and recall my comments from near the start of this discussion), a shared underground garage seems almost inevitable. With the other parties? You incorporated the underground garage into the architect’s site plan.
11ant schrieb:
Nothing illustrates an architect’s incompetence more clearly than a house that, unfortunately and supposedly without alternative due to regulations preventing full storeys, has to become too large – not even a redundant utility room can save it ;-)
Well, it’s more of a burden acoustically than an asset. Well, very constructive. Like all your posts in general. °°
The peephole should only be in the hallway, not opening into the living room where the grand piano is located.
Similar topics