We know that one draft, right?! It has already been discussed here once. Unfortunately, you have disabled the traceability of your posts, so one cannot look it up. That’s why I also guessed that you had logged off.
The question is, why do you do that? It’s not _us_ who benefit from this discussion, but only you.
As far as I know, I registered here for the first time on Sunday. “Logging off” is also not my style, and I might only have secondary accounts at utility companies that require a new account with a new contract – you’re probably confusing something.
Besides, I am not aware of an option for “traceability” of the posts – presumably just
because I am new here: What should I change?
It should also be in your interest to influence the quality of the answers through attention. It is helpful to be present for that. We are. It doesn’t have to be constantly, but from time to time, one should be.
I do read quite often (e.g. on my phone) even when I don’t reply. And I believe I also fall into the category of “from time to time” with my answers. Furthermore, anyone can have an accident, a bereavement, water damage, an illness, heartbreak, or other issues, so a critical evaluation of reaction time in an asynchronous medium is questionable.
That’s how users want it, at least I speak for myself and know from some floor plan specialists here, that one does not want to gather all info from the posts piece by piece. A clear no or yes in the questionnaire is easier to spot than inserting the requested answer into a sentence.
The idea was that in the first post all known and relevant information would already be present, just in a different form. That gaps remained is indeed an oversight. I hereby take note that some would have preferred the questionnaire 1:1 for the future.
A landing comes in addition to the stairs, so it cannot be docked within the stairs.
Sure, that’s why the landing staircase probably will not lead to a comfortable slope and will instead be spiral. I apparently misinterpreted kbt09’s post – sorry!
Why do you sketch something where concrete changes have to be made, which make the draft obsolete?
It helps me consider options if I can see the defect along with the context.
Is the alignment prescribed in the development plan?
Is there no defined building envelope?
Is the access prescribed like that?
I have not read about any prescribed alignment, access, or building envelope. The existing draft fits in this regard because it is similarly present at neighbors and has not been objected to by the 'informed' builder. Clearly, no statement can be made about the feasibility of another orientation.
The drawn line is not at 5 m ????
Is that a railway line at the bottom in the aerial photo?
Surely the SO street side will also be built on??
The line is at about 4.30 m. Yes, that is the railway line, as I originally mentioned when motivated by the orientation. And yes, there are also building plots opposite. I just considered the orientation settled and therefore did not describe the surrounding area at the beginning – which I should have done.
How many drafts were there in total, and how many evolutionary stages were there between "middle-aged" and the opening post draft?
Maybe a handful – hard to say, especially since not every idea on the ground floor was then converted into a fitting upper floor, as it already didn’t fit downstairs.
I also make sketches with zero-width walls "when it has to be quick," but I keep in mind (like in third-grade math) “to transfer one meter twenty from the house width and house depth budget each to the special account ‘walls.’”
I did it similarly, only hoping that this account could be balanced out by narrowing the rooms inside. The exterior dimensions of "very old" should be 10m×15m.
Estimating areas would no longer be “quantifying” the room program but would already preempt the qualifying. When quantifying, each room initially only has a name according to its purpose, for example, “living-dining room” and “kitchen,” “living room” and “dining kitchen,” or “living kitchen.” When qualifying, all three then go into the garden level, and afterwards, as a nurse, ward doctor, or chief physician, you give them a size considering their salary.
I would not strictly follow this sequence because the function is more important than the room: Currently (3-room rental apartment) I have my desk in the living room, my wife in the guest room, and with children the workstations might rather be in the bedroom. In doubt, I could work with a notebook at the dining table (with a different chair), so the initially desired study could not only shrink but also disappear.
What do you mean: Insulation of the roof instead of the upper floor ceiling on the one hand and open roof soffits are two different matters (?)
I wanted to clarify that, but the 4-minute limit for editing had already passed. I meant “open roof soffits.”
This is the crucial (Gretchen- or Shakespeare-) question for you: whether your own “paternity” of the house draft matters to you, or whether you (which I consider wiser) are willing to hand over the serious house draft to professional hands. The latter would give your own draft the corresponding freedom not to have to qualify as a serious design.
It’s less about paternity and more about the fact that with an external draft I would constantly ask “Why not like this?” Therefore, I envisaged a joint design iteration with the builder. If that is not done meaningfully or nonsense is accepted without comment, then expertise will have to be bought in. I will put the builder to the test a bit.
I didn’t claim that either. The contradiction referred to “similar areas across two floors” and “single story.” If GF and OG are to be at least approximately equal in size, this results in an OG as a full floor, but here only an attic floor will be possible. A basement was not mentioned in this context at all.
Then that was a misunderstanding: By providing “similar areas across two floors,” I meant that functions normally present in the basement must be distributed across the two remaining floors if the basement is not present.