Legurit
2016-01-06 21:00:22
- #1
Do you have a special view from the window? T-Lösung, I think, always depends - I have been in several and did not find them all nice. Just like spots, most are awful and dazzle or cast shadows - different topic.
Floor plan ideas, 2.5 stories
- Erstellt am 2016-01-04 20:12:21
Grym
2016-01-06 21:04:42
- #2
In the first post, image 4 shows the surroundings. Basically, there are no surroundings yet, as the construction area is completely new.
ypg
2016-01-06 22:00:45
- #3
The house reminds me of a 4-family house. I don’t find it beautiful. 200sqm plus attic?! I think it has now become this big to comply with all the rules and every architect? What does the financing say - wasn’t there a limit?
Grym
2016-01-06 22:30:50
- #4
The costs did not rise linearly at all, and this was also confirmed to us by a civil engineer who works in the residential construction sector and recently built "as big as allowed" himself. Not even the shell construction rises linearly; many other trades do not increase in cost at all or at least not as long as no additional rooms are added. But that should not be the topic. Financing is not an issue. In the worst case, we build 1 year later and have an estimated 30,000 EUR more equity. But even without this measure, it should not be a problem.
It should be in the range of 185-190 sqm plus attic. Others build 185-190 sqm plus basement. But don't be fooled by the numbers, it is visually probably indistinguishable from a 160 sqm house of, for example, 10.20 x 10.20. One side is 14 percent longer, the other side is 3 percent longer. You never see 3 percent, and even 14 percent I doubt.
Its size is roughly comparable to a Weberhaus CityLife 600 or even a bit smaller than a Lifestyle 29 from Massa Haus, which stands among other places in Bannewitz near Dresden (pictures on Google with the respective keywords). The latter house was, as I was told, ordered twice for the mentioned construction area. So our house would not even be the largest in the development.
4-family house? If you subtract usable units, add corridors, etc., maybe 30-40 sqm remain for each of the 4 families on that floor plan.
Do you see any possibilities to make compromises WITHOUT reducing the space offered?
Just for comparison, the house with a hip roof. However, the expansion potential would be very limited here, and we might have to consider a basement.
Edit: Another house for visual comparison: the Helma house Leipzig. The floor area is almost exactly comparable, but the eave height is significantly higher, while the roof pitch is much less steep. These are not unusual dimensions that we have here. It’s just a "somewhat" larger house.
It should be in the range of 185-190 sqm plus attic. Others build 185-190 sqm plus basement. But don't be fooled by the numbers, it is visually probably indistinguishable from a 160 sqm house of, for example, 10.20 x 10.20. One side is 14 percent longer, the other side is 3 percent longer. You never see 3 percent, and even 14 percent I doubt.
Its size is roughly comparable to a Weberhaus CityLife 600 or even a bit smaller than a Lifestyle 29 from Massa Haus, which stands among other places in Bannewitz near Dresden (pictures on Google with the respective keywords). The latter house was, as I was told, ordered twice for the mentioned construction area. So our house would not even be the largest in the development.
4-family house? If you subtract usable units, add corridors, etc., maybe 30-40 sqm remain for each of the 4 families on that floor plan.
Do you see any possibilities to make compromises WITHOUT reducing the space offered?
Just for comparison, the house with a hip roof. However, the expansion potential would be very limited here, and we might have to consider a basement.
Edit: Another house for visual comparison: the Helma house Leipzig. The floor area is almost exactly comparable, but the eave height is significantly higher, while the roof pitch is much less steep. These are not unusual dimensions that we have here. It’s just a "somewhat" larger house.
ypg
2016-01-06 23:39:33
- #5
It's not about the usable space, but about the appearance. It has become a block, charm and design are left behind. I will not make any counterproposals, as there are plenty of great houses in this size category!
Grym
2016-01-08 19:23:51
- #6
I also initially had concerns about the exterior appearance, although the visuals, as mentioned, are rather inconclusive. However, I just remembered why I was still of the opinion that 2 full stories plus a 35-degree gable roof are completely fine.
From a purely exterior perspective, we liked the Waldsee house from Gussek Haus, and it is visually very similar to our design with dimensions of 13.05 x 10.25 and a 35-degree gable roof. In depth, we have 30 cm more (2.9 percent longer), but 139 cm less in width (10.7 percent shorter). The eaves height and roof pitch should be almost the same; the total height should be about 9.69 m for us and 9.59 m for the Gussek Haus Waldsee, meaning 1.1 percent higher.
In terms of volume, our design therefore corresponds almost exactly to the Gussek Haus Waldsee, only 10 percent narrower in width. And I find this house visually chic from the outside and not blocky or looking like a four-family house.
Depth, height, roof pitch, and eaves height would be practically identical for us, as mentioned, with 10 percent missing in width. Do you (or other fellow readers here who are welcome to freely share their opinions) still find it blocky or do you also find my prefab house example blocky? Or are my visuals just poorly made, but a Waldsee house minus 10 percent in width already looks good?
One more tip if anyone wants to take a look at this example house: There are images in the Facebook search that you won't find on Google.
From a purely exterior perspective, we liked the Waldsee house from Gussek Haus, and it is visually very similar to our design with dimensions of 13.05 x 10.25 and a 35-degree gable roof. In depth, we have 30 cm more (2.9 percent longer), but 139 cm less in width (10.7 percent shorter). The eaves height and roof pitch should be almost the same; the total height should be about 9.69 m for us and 9.59 m for the Gussek Haus Waldsee, meaning 1.1 percent higher.
In terms of volume, our design therefore corresponds almost exactly to the Gussek Haus Waldsee, only 10 percent narrower in width. And I find this house visually chic from the outside and not blocky or looking like a four-family house.
Depth, height, roof pitch, and eaves height would be practically identical for us, as mentioned, with 10 percent missing in width. Do you (or other fellow readers here who are welcome to freely share their opinions) still find it blocky or do you also find my prefab house example blocky? Or are my visuals just poorly made, but a Waldsee house minus 10 percent in width already looks good?
One more tip if anyone wants to take a look at this example house: There are images in the Facebook search that you won't find on Google.