Triplex Plans, Please Critique !
- Thread starter Chomp
- Start date
Gut feeling is - could be better.
Where are they going to be built?
Are you coming tomorrow? If you are bring a set for me to scribble over.
Where are they going to be built?
Are you coming tomorrow? If you are bring a set for me to scribble over.
Hi Westminster, cant make the meeting as I had a few things on, I would really appreciate your thoughts though ? suburb is Hamilton Hill.
I was thinking the middle unit should be up against the boundary, too much space wasted with the 1m setback maybe same with the rear, but it still has to make the % of open space ?
Hey Chomp,
Yup they need to push the envelope more. Is it R40? So they need to take it up to 58% coverage instead of 55%. This does mean 42% open space. It's 3% of discretion to Council has up it's sleeve and if you use it right it makes a lot of difference.
I'm guessing the block is around 750 m2 which is another 22m2 of house if you take up that 3%. Not much spread over 3 houses but 7m2 in a triplex is a lot of room.
Building to boundary does cost more but it also makes financial sense when you then end up with a larger house plus more useable outdoor area.
Actually looking at the design more I suspect it might be R60.
Can you confirm?
Yup they need to push the envelope more. Is it R40? So they need to take it up to 58% coverage instead of 55%. This does mean 42% open space. It's 3% of discretion to Council has up it's sleeve and if you use it right it makes a lot of difference.
I'm guessing the block is around 750 m2 which is another 22m2 of house if you take up that 3%. Not much spread over 3 houses but 7m2 in a triplex is a lot of room.
Building to boundary does cost more but it also makes financial sense when you then end up with a larger house plus more useable outdoor area.
Actually looking at the design more I suspect it might be R60.
Can you confirm?
I thought it might have been R60 because of the small setbacks on front unit. R40 is 4m setbacks and you only have 3m - maybe that is why the storeroom is set back like that - to make an avg of 4m setback
Where is the storeroom for middle unit? Oh found it!
I hate to admit it but I can't really pinpoint why they don't work for me. They just don't appeal - just seems wrong. Sorry!
IMO,
Unit 1: Delete the Laundry and make one similar to the one in Unit 2. A cupboard in a bathroom is a great place. Consider if the bathtub is necessary. Removing it will allow for a larger shower and make the room less crowded.
Unit 2: To move the toilet away from the Kitchen I would flip the bathroom, consider the need for the tub and face the door towards the hallway. The toilet can be flipped to the other side of the room and the wall between the current basin and toilet setup can be removed to allow access to the toilet.
I don't know the area or the target demo but sometimes decreasing the number of bedrooms in a dwelling and increasing the sizes of other rooms can yield positive results.
Jeremy
Unit 1: Delete the Laundry and make one similar to the one in Unit 2. A cupboard in a bathroom is a great place. Consider if the bathtub is necessary. Removing it will allow for a larger shower and make the room less crowded.
Unit 2: To move the toilet away from the Kitchen I would flip the bathroom, consider the need for the tub and face the door towards the hallway. The toilet can be flipped to the other side of the room and the wall between the current basin and toilet setup can be removed to allow access to the toilet.
I don't know the area or the target demo but sometimes decreasing the number of bedrooms in a dwelling and increasing the sizes of other rooms can yield positive results.
Jeremy
Last edited:
Hey chomp,
I don't think you can increase the Alfresco that much - it can only cover a certain amount of the courtyard.
And did you take out some of the store in the middle one? You can't do that either - it needs to be 4sqm minimum.
I like the other changes to the rear one.
I don't think you can increase the Alfresco that much - it can only cover a certain amount of the courtyard.
And did you take out some of the store in the middle one? You can't do that either - it needs to be 4sqm minimum.
I like the other changes to the rear one.
You'll want to average 4m to the front. Ham Hill is Cockburn? Should take advantage of ADP 49 and 58 as well if its offered.
I think these are okay plans. Not bad but could be better. The person that drew these obviously understands a price point for all its good and bad connotations.
Send an email to me (mail @ mywebsite ) and I will show you what you can do with 728.
I think these are okay plans. Not bad but could be better. The person that drew these obviously understands a price point for all its good and bad connotations.
Send an email to me (mail @ mywebsite ) and I will show you what you can do with 728.
When I saw the title, I thought I read 'Triplesex Plans, Please.'
I think I have to rub my eyes harder in the morning to wake up, LOL!
I think I have to rub my eyes harder in the morning to wake up, LOL!
ok thanks for the reply, the rear house alfresco was increased but its just a rough design change at this stage. I would like to extend the living room out further to reduce the alfresco, I think so long as you have enough room for a BBQ and and a nice outdoor setting that is enough, so good point noted.
The store remains on the middle house, but I moved the middle linen cupboard further up the passage as it was right next the front door entrance which I thought was a bit weird !
I feel a lot better about the designs now, almost there
settlement next month.ok thanks Aaron, he has averaged the 4m I think you can see it on the site plan on my original post.
What is ADP 49 & 58 ?
allows for different and more generous boundary wall positions and open space variations which mean bigger units.
