Hello everyone,
we have a problem with planning our house and hope you can help us.
We found our dream plot (680 sqm (7300 sq ft), 25m x 25m (82 ft x 82 ft)) and also had our dream house in mind: an L-shaped bungalow, 145 sqm (1560 sq ft), 5 rooms. Everything was set in our minds.
Since there is no zoning plan for the plot, we asked the local building authority about the possible development and told them our idea (175 sqm (1887 sq ft) gross floor area...). The really kind gentleman on the phone said it would be very difficult to get approval because we have to adapt to the surrounding buildings and none of them have such a large footprint. Building in the second row apparently makes it even "worse" (although the house is not visible from the street and there is forest on the other side, well…). This can only be clarified with a preliminary building permit, which we now want to apply for. He suggested reducing the footprint to 155 sqm (1668 sq ft) to have a better chance.
So for us, it meant downsizing the house, expanding the roof, or building two stories. My husband insists on the bungalow, as he wants to live on one level when he’s older, finds it nice and practical. He doesn’t like sloping ceilings and we both don’t like urban villas. So two stories are out.
Our house builder offered us a 125 sqm (1345 sq ft) bungalow (4 rooms), including roof expansion, which would cost about €30,000 extra with everything included (windows, stairs, different ceiling, etc.). But the thing is, we don’t need a fully developed 125 sqm attic, we just want a 5th room (office) under the roof. But that’s €30,000 extra, so what to do with the rest of the space?
My husband says that as long as we don’t have children, we have two rooms, one of which can be used as an office. But in 4-5 years, a second child should arrive (planning for the first is underway...), so what then? Since I’m a teacher, I always have to work from home and need space for my materials. I also have a crafting and sewing desk that wouldn’t fit in a 125 sqm house.
Now we are going back and forth, and we have no more creative ideas where to “fit” the 5th room. Ideally, we’d want the 145 sqm bungalow, but the preliminary permit wouldn’t have the best chances of being approved. That would mean a 3-month waiting period and 400 euros lost (the 3 months waiting bother us more than the 400 euros), and if the 145 sqm is rejected, we’d have to apply for another preliminary permit for the 125 sqm bungalow (again 3 months and 400 euros). And expanding the attic for one room would be a lot of money that we actually didn’t want to spend. My husband is strongly against two stories… really just an awkward situation. We know we have to make compromises, but nothing seems like a good compromise. My husband would prefer to drop the 5th room since he simply doesn’t need it… but I can’t see myself without a workspace 🙁
Maybe you have some ideas/opinions/experiences on this topic?
Many thanks and sorry for the long post 🙄
Best regards, CoCoBB
we have a problem with planning our house and hope you can help us.
We found our dream plot (680 sqm (7300 sq ft), 25m x 25m (82 ft x 82 ft)) and also had our dream house in mind: an L-shaped bungalow, 145 sqm (1560 sq ft), 5 rooms. Everything was set in our minds.
Since there is no zoning plan for the plot, we asked the local building authority about the possible development and told them our idea (175 sqm (1887 sq ft) gross floor area...). The really kind gentleman on the phone said it would be very difficult to get approval because we have to adapt to the surrounding buildings and none of them have such a large footprint. Building in the second row apparently makes it even "worse" (although the house is not visible from the street and there is forest on the other side, well…). This can only be clarified with a preliminary building permit, which we now want to apply for. He suggested reducing the footprint to 155 sqm (1668 sq ft) to have a better chance.
So for us, it meant downsizing the house, expanding the roof, or building two stories. My husband insists on the bungalow, as he wants to live on one level when he’s older, finds it nice and practical. He doesn’t like sloping ceilings and we both don’t like urban villas. So two stories are out.
Our house builder offered us a 125 sqm (1345 sq ft) bungalow (4 rooms), including roof expansion, which would cost about €30,000 extra with everything included (windows, stairs, different ceiling, etc.). But the thing is, we don’t need a fully developed 125 sqm attic, we just want a 5th room (office) under the roof. But that’s €30,000 extra, so what to do with the rest of the space?
My husband says that as long as we don’t have children, we have two rooms, one of which can be used as an office. But in 4-5 years, a second child should arrive (planning for the first is underway...), so what then? Since I’m a teacher, I always have to work from home and need space for my materials. I also have a crafting and sewing desk that wouldn’t fit in a 125 sqm house.
Now we are going back and forth, and we have no more creative ideas where to “fit” the 5th room. Ideally, we’d want the 145 sqm bungalow, but the preliminary permit wouldn’t have the best chances of being approved. That would mean a 3-month waiting period and 400 euros lost (the 3 months waiting bother us more than the 400 euros), and if the 145 sqm is rejected, we’d have to apply for another preliminary permit for the 125 sqm bungalow (again 3 months and 400 euros). And expanding the attic for one room would be a lot of money that we actually didn’t want to spend. My husband is strongly against two stories… really just an awkward situation. We know we have to make compromises, but nothing seems like a good compromise. My husband would prefer to drop the 5th room since he simply doesn’t need it… but I can’t see myself without a workspace 🙁
Maybe you have some ideas/opinions/experiences on this topic?
Many thanks and sorry for the long post 🙄
Best regards, CoCoBB
N
nordanney28 Apr 2014 20:15Stupid question, but how old are you that you are planning for children but already want to build a house for old age?
If only a bungalow is an acceptable compromise for you, why don’t you wait to convert the attic until it’s actually needed? This way, you save money upfront while keeping all future options open.
My approach, however, is to live in the present. That means right now I don’t need a house for old age but a home where life with children is lively (preferably spread over two or three floors). When life circumstances change, the house should change as well — either by building a new home for old age or, perhaps more comfortably, by moving to a condominium with a large terrace or a big balcony.
If only a bungalow is an acceptable compromise for you, why don’t you wait to convert the attic until it’s actually needed? This way, you save money upfront while keeping all future options open.
My approach, however, is to live in the present. That means right now I don’t need a house for old age but a home where life with children is lively (preferably spread over two or three floors). When life circumstances change, the house should change as well — either by building a new home for old age or, perhaps more comfortably, by moving to a condominium with a large terrace or a big balcony.
Hello Nordanney,
We are both 30 years old, so there's still some time before old age 😉
I see it similarly to you... for me, it doesn’t have to be a house specifically for old age yet, but my husband definitely wants to grow old in this house and he’s not willing to compromise on that. He always wants to consider every possible scenario. Especially since the alternatives aren’t exactly abundant if you don’t want sloped ceilings or a "townhouse" style.
We are already considering the option of finishing the attic later – however, we would need to invest around 15,000 euros (about $16,000) now just to make the attic expandable at all (roof windows/dormers, concrete ceiling, different roof structure, possibly a proper staircase instead of the folding ladder to the attic!?)… and then probably another 10,000 euros (about $11,000) later for the actual finishing. What about the electrical and heating systems? Can they be easily extended to the attic later, or does that need to be done now? And what if we end up not using it, for example because having a second child doesn’t work out or for some other reason? Then the 15,000 euros (about $16,000) would be wasted. That would be frustrating too. But maybe it really is the best compromise...
We are both 30 years old, so there's still some time before old age 😉
I see it similarly to you... for me, it doesn’t have to be a house specifically for old age yet, but my husband definitely wants to grow old in this house and he’s not willing to compromise on that. He always wants to consider every possible scenario. Especially since the alternatives aren’t exactly abundant if you don’t want sloped ceilings or a "townhouse" style.
We are already considering the option of finishing the attic later – however, we would need to invest around 15,000 euros (about $16,000) now just to make the attic expandable at all (roof windows/dormers, concrete ceiling, different roof structure, possibly a proper staircase instead of the folding ladder to the attic!?)… and then probably another 10,000 euros (about $11,000) later for the actual finishing. What about the electrical and heating systems? Can they be easily extended to the attic later, or does that need to be done now? And what if we end up not using it, for example because having a second child doesn’t work out or for some other reason? Then the 15,000 euros (about $16,000) would be wasted. That would be frustrating too. But maybe it really is the best compromise...
T
toxicmolotof28 Apr 2014 21:39I’m wondering why someone needs a 145m² (1,560 sq ft) bungalow with 5 rooms when they get older. Hobby room, ironing room...
How about planning the ground floor so that it is completely self-contained and as large as you currently need, including all necessary rooms? That means kitchen, dining, bathroom, living room, bedroom, office, utility connections, storage/laundry room. Then, the upper floor would have a staircase, a second bathroom, and as many children’s bedrooms as needed.
This has two advantages: a separate children’s area, even when the kids are older; if one child moves out, the upstairs can be well planned as a separate apartment for one child, or if both children move out, the extra space can be rented out.
This is how we are planning it right now and are very happy with it. Basically, a complete single-level apartment with added children’s bedrooms on top.
How about planning the ground floor so that it is completely self-contained and as large as you currently need, including all necessary rooms? That means kitchen, dining, bathroom, living room, bedroom, office, utility connections, storage/laundry room. Then, the upper floor would have a staircase, a second bathroom, and as many children’s bedrooms as needed.
This has two advantages: a separate children’s area, even when the kids are older; if one child moves out, the upstairs can be well planned as a separate apartment for one child, or if both children move out, the extra space can be rented out.
This is how we are planning it right now and are very happy with it. Basically, a complete single-level apartment with added children’s bedrooms on top.
Hello Coco,
Your husband obviously has the idea that he can do something no reputable property appraiser can – namely, look 40 to 50 years into the future. There are indeed differing opinions regarding the actual useful life of residential buildings, which particularly consider that the real service life of residential properties is generally becoming shorter because our world and its framework conditions are changing faster and faster. This affects (without claiming to be exhaustive) the following points:
1. Housing requirements in 40 or 50 years
2. Features/quality/technical standards, especially regarding energy supply and costs
3. Development of the immediate surroundings (within 100 to 250 meters (330 to 820 feet))
4. Development of the city/region, especially in relation to the job market, local amenities, hospitals/emergency services, etc. (up to 25 kilometers (15.5 miles))
I would say that I am reasonably interested in this, but planning a property today that meets all demands 30 or 40 years from now and still has potential for another 10 to 20 years is quite a bold task. Just take a look at properties from the 1970s or even the 1980s! They are only about 30 to 40 years old now and are sometimes already completely outdated in terms of energy efficiency and/or usability.
But maybe it’s also a personality thing, because many people actually build a house once in their lifetime and only leave it feet first. Others – myself included – at least plan to change their living conditions when they get older and when the children have left the house. If that is absolutely not an option for your husband… then you should simply choose a different plot of land, because I believe that otherwise you will have to make so many compromises during the construction that you actually do not want to make that in the end you won’t live in the house you envisioned. Third solution – you find an architect who solves all your problems.
Best regards
Dirk Grafe
P.S.: One more thing that comes to mind – if your planning deviates from the permitted building restrictions (building permit / planning permission), it may sometimes be possible to work with neighboring property owner approval. Ultimately, however, the local municipality or city still needs to cooperate.
Your husband obviously has the idea that he can do something no reputable property appraiser can – namely, look 40 to 50 years into the future. There are indeed differing opinions regarding the actual useful life of residential buildings, which particularly consider that the real service life of residential properties is generally becoming shorter because our world and its framework conditions are changing faster and faster. This affects (without claiming to be exhaustive) the following points:
1. Housing requirements in 40 or 50 years
2. Features/quality/technical standards, especially regarding energy supply and costs
3. Development of the immediate surroundings (within 100 to 250 meters (330 to 820 feet))
4. Development of the city/region, especially in relation to the job market, local amenities, hospitals/emergency services, etc. (up to 25 kilometers (15.5 miles))
I would say that I am reasonably interested in this, but planning a property today that meets all demands 30 or 40 years from now and still has potential for another 10 to 20 years is quite a bold task. Just take a look at properties from the 1970s or even the 1980s! They are only about 30 to 40 years old now and are sometimes already completely outdated in terms of energy efficiency and/or usability.
But maybe it’s also a personality thing, because many people actually build a house once in their lifetime and only leave it feet first. Others – myself included – at least plan to change their living conditions when they get older and when the children have left the house. If that is absolutely not an option for your husband… then you should simply choose a different plot of land, because I believe that otherwise you will have to make so many compromises during the construction that you actually do not want to make that in the end you won’t live in the house you envisioned. Third solution – you find an architect who solves all your problems.
Best regards
Dirk Grafe
P.S.: One more thing that comes to mind – if your planning deviates from the permitted building restrictions (building permit / planning permission), it may sometimes be possible to work with neighboring property owner approval. Ultimately, however, the local municipality or city still needs to cooperate.
Similar topics