Location of city villa or single-family house on 500 m2 plot - rectangular

Ok, I can understand why "Connections" can also have a negative association nearby. But seriously, cronyism implies that they somehow collude to my disadvantage in order to gain an advantage. What is supposed to be the assumed advantage on their side in this case?

I don’t see it as dramatically either. Usually, it only has advantages if the contact with the office is good. On the other hand, it may have become such a close-knit team that your general contractor, out of anticipatory obedience, doesn’t even push your wishes but always represents the office’s opinion. That gives the impression that the two are building "their" little town as they like it. If a road alignment or building line is not formulated in any development plan, then there simply isn’t one. Ok, the §34 should orient itself to the neighboring development. But whether the orientation of the house belongs to that is debatable – if necessary even in court. If that were extremely important to you, you might open a can of worms. If it’s relatively indifferent to you, I wouldn’t sue the office even before the start.

I'm going to call anyway, the caseworker on the phone doesn't necessarily spill the beans that the strange Tolentino doesn't trust his site manager. And you are right in that I shouldn't be discouraged by a phone call for a project costing over half a million.

So, I called and explained my concern. The answer was roughly as stated above. The pattern of the neighboring development must be maintained, and the neighbors have all aligned with the street where their parcels lie.
If I can't park there, I'll just have to put the parking space somewhere else. The neighbors also have their spots in front of or next to their houses.

It's not worth a legal dispute for me.

Is there anyone who can say something about the shafts (#122 et seq.)?
Can the house simply be built over them and pipes run in/under, or around the well in that case?
Or do they have to be torn down and filled in? They are concrete, about 1.5m deep each.

Really no one?

Kind (Easter) regards

Tolentino

Hello again,

I wanted to put floor plans up for discussion here once more.

Variant 4 is essentially adopted from , just calibrated to the furnishing as we plan it.

Variant 3 is my attempt to bring the entrance to the parking space side.

I think both have their pros and cons.

I have also re-uploaded the preliminary surveyor’s plan here.

Basic questions are answered in .

Many thanks for your contributions...

Best regards

Tolentino

Regarding option 4 kuckmada: - there recently illustrated again the headroom problem with built-over stair landings.

If I can’t park there, I’ll just have to put the parking space somewhere else. The neighbors would have it there in front of or next to the house anyway.

Huh? I think parking in front of the house is forbidden, prohibited, illegal, against the law, taboo, an administrative offence, not allowed, irregular, unwanted, etc.? Is something maybe possible after all?

the head height problem on overlapped stair landings illustrated.

I can’t speak for the designs of the OP now. But I had of course calculated that. (Now I’m a bit disappointed — what do you think of me? ) The ceiling height / story height is assumed to be 2.60m / 2.90m and the head clearance is over 2.10m.

What I don’t really understand now is: You definitely wanted 3 children’s rooms and now you’re only building 2 that can be separated later?

If that’s the wish, it would be much more elegant to split the children’s rooms 100% evenly in the middle and put up 2 walls later. Disturbing windows can be split into 2 smaller ones instead of one big one. You just have to be careful how you route the electricity and heating.

[ATTACH alt="kizis.jpg" type="full"]45107[/ATTACH]

Putting a closet in the upstairs hallway, however, I consider nonsense. It’s already too tight there anyway. All other changes are rejected by me as well (obviously — ). Especially the living room door must open into the living room — otherwise there would be door chaos immediately. The cloakroom can partially be placed under the stairs, etc.

I don’t like the side entrance at all — but maybe there are other solutions for that.

... it is about the enclosure of the lower staircase steps on the ground floor, which becomes necessary on the upper floor to reach the master bedroom.


For people taller than 180 cm, going downstairs there is uncomfortable. Therefore, especially for floor heights up to 295, that is usually a clear room height up to 260 cm, it might be best not to already use this in the sketch planning. Because experience shows that usually more enclosure is necessary in the actual planning.