Hi everyone,
Until last night (when we visited a home builder), my husband and I were sure we wanted to build a house with 2 dormers...
We finally secured a plot of land in a residential development here (which is not easy due to high demand)! Unfortunately, the area specifies a maximum terrace house height of 4 meters (13 feet) and a detached house height of 9 meters (30 feet). Our dream has always been a Mediterranean-style house, planned as a single-story building. We both find sloped ceilings on the upper floor impractical. But when we received the development plan, we had to consider an alternative.
We decided on two dormers since that helps avoid too many sloped ceilings.
Yesterday, we visited the builder, and he said it was a pity to build a house (which is not exactly cheap) and then have to make such compromises. He also mentioned (something we hadn’t realized before) that the Mediterranean style is actually simpler to build than dormers and therefore significantly less expensive. The bottom line: we would have to spend even more money on a house that we like but not as much as the Mediterranean style.
We felt quite frustrated... And to make matters worse, he said we probably wouldn’t finish the building permit/planning permission application this year anyway, so we would lose out on the KfW70 subsidy, since that will become standard next year. Is that correct?
Do you have any ideas for other house types that would look nice and be feasible with a terrace house height of 4 meters (13 feet) and a detached house height of 9 meters (30 feet)? Our plot is 706 square meters (7,600 square feet), so a bungalow is not an option for us.
Thanks in advance and best regards!
Until last night (when we visited a home builder), my husband and I were sure we wanted to build a house with 2 dormers...
We finally secured a plot of land in a residential development here (which is not easy due to high demand)! Unfortunately, the area specifies a maximum terrace house height of 4 meters (13 feet) and a detached house height of 9 meters (30 feet). Our dream has always been a Mediterranean-style house, planned as a single-story building. We both find sloped ceilings on the upper floor impractical. But when we received the development plan, we had to consider an alternative.
We decided on two dormers since that helps avoid too many sloped ceilings.
Yesterday, we visited the builder, and he said it was a pity to build a house (which is not exactly cheap) and then have to make such compromises. He also mentioned (something we hadn’t realized before) that the Mediterranean style is actually simpler to build than dormers and therefore significantly less expensive. The bottom line: we would have to spend even more money on a house that we like but not as much as the Mediterranean style.
We felt quite frustrated... And to make matters worse, he said we probably wouldn’t finish the building permit/planning permission application this year anyway, so we would lose out on the KfW70 subsidy, since that will become standard next year. Is that correct?
Do you have any ideas for other house types that would look nice and be feasible with a terrace house height of 4 meters (13 feet) and a detached house height of 9 meters (30 feet)? Our plot is 706 square meters (7,600 square feet), so a bungalow is not an option for us.
Thanks in advance and best regards!
Bauexperte schrieb:
Then he should hit the books again Could you please explain this in more detail? I also always thought that with a ceiling height of 4 m (13 ft), a mezzanine floor as shown in the attachment is not feasible.
M
Milanni12319 Nov 2015 14:27...yes, I would also be grateful for any tips!
Then I might explain it to him again, and maybe he can still do it after all?!
Then I might explain it to him again, and maybe he can still do it after all?!
B
Bauexperte19 Nov 2015 19:12Good evening,
That is incorrect.
Paragraph 2 of the Lower Saxony Building Code for Lower Saxony states (similarly for NRW and many other federal states):
(6) A storey above ground level is a storey whose ceiling upper edge on average projects more than 1.40m (4.6 feet) above the ground surface. [...]
(7) 1 - A full storey is an above-ground storey that has a clear height of 2.20m (7.2 feet) or more over at least half of its floor area. 2 - A top storey is only considered a full storey if it has the clear height according to sentence 1 over more than two-thirds of the floor area of the storey below it.
This also means that compliance with the ridge height for constructing a setback storey (setback floor) is irrelevant—how could it be otherwise? What matters is the facade height. Therefore, if a zoning plan does not explicitly prohibit a setback storey (rare but possible), the responsible building authority cannot deny approval.
Honestly? If this person does not know the simplest basic rules of building law, how is he supposed to sell you a house?
Best regards, Bauexperte
alexm86 schrieb:
Could you please explain that in more detail? I always thought that with a ridge height of 4m, a setback storey like in the attachment is not possible.
That is incorrect.
Paragraph 2 of the Lower Saxony Building Code for Lower Saxony states (similarly for NRW and many other federal states):
(6) A storey above ground level is a storey whose ceiling upper edge on average projects more than 1.40m (4.6 feet) above the ground surface. [...]
(7) 1 - A full storey is an above-ground storey that has a clear height of 2.20m (7.2 feet) or more over at least half of its floor area. 2 - A top storey is only considered a full storey if it has the clear height according to sentence 1 over more than two-thirds of the floor area of the storey below it.
This also means that compliance with the ridge height for constructing a setback storey (setback floor) is irrelevant—how could it be otherwise? What matters is the facade height. Therefore, if a zoning plan does not explicitly prohibit a setback storey (rare but possible), the responsible building authority cannot deny approval.
Milanni123 schrieb:
Then maybe I would explain it to him again, and maybe he could do it after all?!
Honestly? If this person does not know the simplest basic rules of building law, how is he supposed to sell you a house?
Best regards, Bauexperte
N
nordanney19 Nov 2015 19:22To be honest, Bauexperte, you are wrong here (as also confirmed by courts). The eaves height is calculated separately for each floor, so your example would not be approved. Unless you have ceiling heights for dwarfs.
M
Milanni12319 Nov 2015 19:27Bauexperte schrieb:
Honestly? If the guy doesn’t even know the most basic building regulations, how can he sell you a house? Actually, I had complete trust in him. I always felt that he knew what he was talking about... He also said something like:
The eaves height, which is set in a development plan / zoning plan, is measured at the upper roof surface of the top floor in a stepped (setback) story. Even if it’s not a full storey.
Now I’m confused. I will ask him about it... Somehow I don’t understand the legal paragraphs. But I was always bad at law anyway.
We have a standard gable roof with an approximate knee wall height of 1.65 m (5.4 feet) from the finished floor level. The building is single-story (which means no bay windows or dormers, and a long building footprint), but with a ridge height of 4 m (13.1 feet), this becomes quite substantial.
A mansard roof might be an option—or, as a building expert calls it, a recessed upper floor—although this likely depends somewhat on the federal state where the ridge height is measured.
For example, I found a ruling from Greifswald regarding this:
A mansard roof might be an option—or, as a building expert calls it, a recessed upper floor—although this likely depends somewhat on the federal state where the ridge height is measured.
For example, I found a ruling from Greifswald regarding this:
Similar topics