ᐅ Traditional single-family house with a gable roof, approximately 130 square meters
Created on: 17 Jul 2017 08:20
A
Andi1888
Hello,
Do you perhaps have some useful tips regarding the floor plans?
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 800 sqm (8,600 sq ft)
Slope: no
Site coverage ratio: 0.3
Boundary development: prefabricated garage on the boundary with possible access to the utility room
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of floors: 2
Roof type: gable roof 40-50°
Architectural style: classic single-family house
Maximum height / limits: 4.40 m (14 ft 5 in) eaves height
Client Requirements
Style, roof shape, building type: 40°, classic single-family house
Basement, floors: no basement, 2 floors
Number of occupants, age: two adults, two children under 5 years
Space requirements on ground and upper floors: approx. 60 sqm (645 sq ft) each
Office: family use or home office?
Overnight guests per year: 0
Open or closed architecture: only open kitchen
Conservative or modern construction: conservative
Open kitchen, kitchen island: open kitchen without island
Number of dining seats: 8-10
Fireplace: no
Garage, carport: prefabricated garage
House Design
Who designed it: DIY
What do you particularly like? Why?:
What do you dislike? Why?: utility room too small?
Cost estimate by architect/planner: €230,000
Personal budget for house including equipment: €250,000
Preferred heating system: air heat pump
Do you perhaps have some useful tips regarding the floor plans?
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 800 sqm (8,600 sq ft)
Slope: no
Site coverage ratio: 0.3
Boundary development: prefabricated garage on the boundary with possible access to the utility room
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of floors: 2
Roof type: gable roof 40-50°
Architectural style: classic single-family house
Maximum height / limits: 4.40 m (14 ft 5 in) eaves height
Client Requirements
Style, roof shape, building type: 40°, classic single-family house
Basement, floors: no basement, 2 floors
Number of occupants, age: two adults, two children under 5 years
Space requirements on ground and upper floors: approx. 60 sqm (645 sq ft) each
Office: family use or home office?
Overnight guests per year: 0
Open or closed architecture: only open kitchen
Conservative or modern construction: conservative
Open kitchen, kitchen island: open kitchen without island
Number of dining seats: 8-10
Fireplace: no
Garage, carport: prefabricated garage
House Design
Who designed it: DIY
What do you particularly like? Why?:
What do you dislike? Why?: utility room too small?
Cost estimate by architect/planner: €230,000
Personal budget for house including equipment: €250,000
Preferred heating system: air heat pump
Thanks first for the feedback.
The plot is 20m (66 feet) wide and 40m (131 feet) deep.
The orientation can be seen in the picture.
The requirement is:
Buildable area starts 15m (49 feet) from the property boundary, with a build zone depth of 15m (49 feet).
The door swing directions in the hallway are not finalized yet.
The windows on the upper floor are not square; they are floor-to-ceiling windows.
The utility room is quite small, that’s true. However, I’m not sure where I could gain more space here.
Since a garage on the boundary (9m x 3m x 2.5m) (30 x 10 x 8 feet) is planned and the attic is still available, I don’t see the space issue as too critical at the moment.
The door in the utility room has now been planned to open inward.
The plot is 20m (66 feet) wide and 40m (131 feet) deep.
The orientation can be seen in the picture.
The requirement is:
Buildable area starts 15m (49 feet) from the property boundary, with a build zone depth of 15m (49 feet).
The door swing directions in the hallway are not finalized yet.
The windows on the upper floor are not square; they are floor-to-ceiling windows.
The utility room is quite small, that’s true. However, I’m not sure where I could gain more space here.
Since a garage on the boundary (9m x 3m x 2.5m) (30 x 10 x 8 feet) is planned and the attic is still available, I don’t see the space issue as too critical at the moment.
The door in the utility room has now been planned to open inward.
Andi1888 schrieb:
The windows on the upper floor are not square; they are floor-to-ceiling windows. Oops, yes, one twenty-six / two twenty-six, I did misread that. Still, I don’t really imagine the facades looking that successful.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
ypg schrieb:
What is the knee wall height?About 1.25 meters (4 feet) is planned.
11ant schrieb:
I’m not sure the facades will turn out very well there.What would you suggest here? The windows can still be shifted a bit, and the dimensions are not final yet.
Small and compact is generally fine in my opinion! But not with a square floor plan. The proportions, for example of the open-plan living area on the ground floor, are completely off. There is way too much unused space once you furnish it. Even just for a kitchen with a breakfast bar, the space is either too narrow or, without a bar, too wide.
There is also a significant lack of storage space. The utility room won’t be able to compensate for this, as the 6 sqm (65 sq ft) is fully occupied with equipment and a washing machine. That leaves barely 1 sqm (11 sq ft) of workspace for sorting laundry. Additionally, the rooms are designed in such a way that you can’t even place a cupboard behind a door to save space.
I find the floor-level windows to be a bit of a disaster, as the incoming light illuminates the ceiling rather than the room itself. The bathroom at 13 sqm (140 sq ft) is completely oversized, but there’s no room in the bedroom for a 3-meter (10 ft) wardrobe.
Under the stairs, all outerwear for four people will just become a clutter spot. The door in the utility room is completely unnecessary and takes up even more usable space. The patio windows should be standardized to one size.
All in all, I really don’t like this at all; it’s one of the most poorly thought-out floor plans I’ve seen. Since this is a standard floor plan, it should be easy to find a similar house on the websites of various home builders where the proportions are more practical. The building envelope isn’t that small, and some of the window placements could be reconsidered.
You’ll probably be much happier with something like an 8 by 11-meter (26 by 36 ft) layout or similar 🙂
There is also a significant lack of storage space. The utility room won’t be able to compensate for this, as the 6 sqm (65 sq ft) is fully occupied with equipment and a washing machine. That leaves barely 1 sqm (11 sq ft) of workspace for sorting laundry. Additionally, the rooms are designed in such a way that you can’t even place a cupboard behind a door to save space.
I find the floor-level windows to be a bit of a disaster, as the incoming light illuminates the ceiling rather than the room itself. The bathroom at 13 sqm (140 sq ft) is completely oversized, but there’s no room in the bedroom for a 3-meter (10 ft) wardrobe.
Under the stairs, all outerwear for four people will just become a clutter spot. The door in the utility room is completely unnecessary and takes up even more usable space. The patio windows should be standardized to one size.
All in all, I really don’t like this at all; it’s one of the most poorly thought-out floor plans I’ve seen. Since this is a standard floor plan, it should be easy to find a similar house on the websites of various home builders where the proportions are more practical. The building envelope isn’t that small, and some of the window placements could be reconsidered.
You’ll probably be much happier with something like an 8 by 11-meter (26 by 36 ft) layout or similar 🙂
ypg schrieb:
This is one of the most poorly thought-out floor plans I have seen. Since this is a standard floor plan,That’s a bit contradictory, isn’t it? 😉
Similar topics