Floor plan of a detached house on a corner plot: sketches by the architect, two variants

Hello everyone,
thank you very much for your suggestions and questions so far, that really helps us a lot!
We try to respond to everyone here in a focused manner – if it gets too confusing, please let us know.
Excerpt from the development plan see below. This also clarifies the question about the development on the neighboring property – the two-story building envelope on our property borders the garage (not basemented) on the neighboring property. So on this street, the houses in chain construction are always arranged in pairs (garage-main house-garage-main house).

What is that supposed to mean? Where is the deviation?

In the north, the garage/living room is moved forward by about 2.50 meters.
In the east, the house is about 2 meters wider than in the development plan (however, the garage is already about 1.30 meters wider than in the development plan).
In the south, the roof overhang extends about 80 cm beyond the building envelope according to the development plan.
And the outbuilding is used not only as a garage, as specified in the development plan, but also as living space.

That will be a huge house with endless storage space in the basement. But rather little closet space in the master area.
The children’s bathroom could also become a bit tight.

About the basement size in general:
The size of the basement results from various aspects:
The exclusive basement of the main house would not be good in terms of light, only basementing the garage/living room would be too small for us.
The architect initially planned one room less for the basement in the south. But we wanted a little more space. Especially the multifunctional room (mainly for guests and music) suits us very well.

In the master area, we currently manage with about 2 m of closet space, which is basically already an increase :) and will most likely be sufficient for us.

Thanks for the suggestion about the children’s bathroom, we will think about it again.

With such large rooms, I definitely find a kitchen island better, which then always allows two routes to all places in the kitchen.

I don’t understand the orange-marked stub, why should there still be a cabinet behind the all-room access door? Rather continue the wall from the office etc. and thereby have the option for 4 tall cabinets in the kitchen.

Thanks also for the suggestion. The stub resulted from the idea to make a lockable pantry at the northern end of the kitchen. But we have moved away from this idea a bit again. However, it is definitely a good idea to continue the wall, if statically possible (we will check).

We are not yet really finished with the kitchen and also want to consult with the kitchen studio again.

Without a basement, that’s about 160 sqm living space. There have been much worse room layouts here before.

Cool, thanks for the calculation, we hadn’t done that yet because according to the architect we should first focus on our usage profile. But it’s definitely very interesting.

I’ll start and ask about the budget.

All in all, we would like to manage with 700,000€ gross (+ demolition of the existing building on the property).

I think it’s pretty cool at first glance. Are you building something attached on the left side? Is that why there is no window in the children’s bathroom? Is light possible through the roof?

We like to hear that of course :)
Yes and yes, see development plan – light through the roof is a very good idea!

The house looks like a 1980 existing building updated stylistically in 2020, and slightly spacey styled like . I like the shed for bicycles and garbage bins, also that the architect sketches by hand here. “More info about the environmental classification” I can only agree with. The missing fourth view and the basement boundary irritation probably come from an extension to a property boundary on the left side, where the hatching probably represents the neighboring house – what kind of house is this: the “other semi-detached half” or a terraced house, and does it not have a basement?

The hint about the other house is great – we will check that right away. Hopefully the rest is answered at the beginning.

However, the house would benefit from 10 sqm above top edge. The large basement irritates me a bit.

What do you mean by that? 10 sqm more overall divided between ground and upper floor, or just 10 sqm more on the upper floor?
That would only be possible by extension to the south (if the development plan is not to be exceeded further).

A kitchen is a kitchen. Some light will fall onto the dining area in the afternoon through the kitchen window. But believe me: a bright seating area, e.g. for schoolwork, shouldn’t have a roof here. I’m not saying that it will be dark.

We also thought long about the roof overhang and were afraid it would take too much light from us or look too massive.
But we like this part in combination with the roof/west overhang visually in the 3D rendering very much now.
We want a large covered area on the terrace that also allows sitting outside in summer without an additional sunshade or even an awning. Therefore we had to decide. According to the architect, still enough light comes in at least with 2 floor-to-ceiling windows on the south side of the kitchen, because the kitchen side doesn’t have a roof. We have also seen a short sun position simulation, even with the long overhang sun falls into the house in winter... (of course not up to the dining table).
Additionally, light enters the room through the all-room access door (which should be a loft door with a lot of glass), the staircase is generously lit.

I would take the panoramic window in the living room and the large window in the kitchen.

That’s how we see it too!
We’re considering designing the large panoramic window in the living room as a seating window (with a parapet height of about 75 cm).
With the sofa in front, that would create a second seating level to watch movies on the screen on the north wall.
Maybe a bit (too) ambitious... we are still thinking about it.

Excerpt from the development plan see below. This also clarifies the question about the development on the neighboring property - the two-story building envelope on our property borders the garage (not basemented) on the neighboring property. So on this street, the houses in terraced construction are always arranged in pairs (garage-main house-garage-main house). [...]
To the north, the garage/living room is about 2.50 meters further forward.
To the east, the house is about 2 meters wider than in the development plan (however, the garage is already about 1.30 meters wider than in the development plan).
To the south, the roof extends about 80 cm beyond the building envelope according to the development plan.

Unfortunately, both attachments are too small in resolution and image section. Even if – which I fear – the ensemble concept is not part of the framework conditions here, the bag of exemption requests seems too heavy to me.

All in all, we would like to manage with €700,000 gross (+demolition of the existing building on the property)

I like to start right from the beginning, so not just with the cleared property. Then you start at zero, not at minus.

Hello,

The house looks stylistically as if a building from 1980 was given a visual update in 2020

I had a similar impression as well. In my opinion, the reason for this is the height of the offset parapet cladding; this style was modern in the 70s. The offset roof edge claddings made of folded sheets are typical. A slimmer roof overhang would be more visually appealing. Presumably, however, the cantilever is wrapped with insulation material, which explains its thickness. The alternative with insulation baskets, of course, is expensive. I would talk with the architect again to realize a flat roof solution that does not require a parapet above the insulation thickness (e.g., with a recessed sheet metal edge as a gravel trap).

Another aspect is the arrangement and size of the windows, especially the three small windows in a row on the upper floor. Connect the windows into a strip using recessed insulation panels (in no case just color the plaster differently...). Child 2's window should have only one sash, asymmetrical to the fixed glazing. The same applies to Child 1.

I find the floor plan good, though some fine-tuning is still missing here and there. No bathtub desired?

Many greetings

In the north, the garage/living room is moved about 2.50 meters further forward. In the east, the house is about 2 meters wider than in the development plan (however, the garage is already about 1.30 meters wider than in the development plan). In the south, the roof extends about 80cm beyond the building window according to the development plan. And the outbuilding is used not only as a garage, as specified in the development plan, but also as living space.

Phew, that's quite a lot of deviations! Have you already been in contact with the building authority because of this? Are there otherwise generous deviations/exemptions in the surrounding area? In our case, that wouldn't be approved with the reasoning that they don't want to set a precedent. Of course, it looks different if the development plan in the immediate neighborhood was also interpreted very generously.

similar occurred to me as well. In my opinion, the cause is the height of the set-back attic cladding; this style was modern in the 70s.

The trend towards wide brims is precisely the 2020s touch. Besides reminding me of the beginnings of , it also reminds me of by

The property should be provided with dimensions and please make it a bit larger. Is one side of the illegible document the complete development plan?

Do you not want a bathtub in the whole house? I would like to take a look at the bathrooms if there are dimensioned floor plans. 4 windows in the bathroom? In my opinion, the corner window slots in the shower cabin are too much. Apart from that, something like that is also expensive.

The staircase is sketched a bit wide, or does the architect want steps wider than 1 m? The 20 cm would do the bathroom well. The triangular landing looks really cool.

The architect seems to get along well with the municipality. Otherwise, the whole design is useless. You will lose a lot of time for a new attempt. Has the architect expressed any concerns about the many deviations?

Did I miss it? Which federal state / region?