ᐅ Preliminary floor plan design for a 220 m² single-family house
Created on: 20 Jun 2017 22:41
R
R.Hotzenplotz
Hello!
We have already gone through several plans with our architect and I think we are almost there, about to start the detailed planning phase. Before that, I’m looking forward to getting feedback from other users.
Development plan/restrictions: §34 – two full stories
Plot size: 1,085m² (1,1679 yd²)
Basement, floors – 2 full stories plus partial basement
Number of people, ages – 3 people (37, 34, 1, second child planned)
Space requirements on ground floor and upper floor – the requirement was that bedrooms and the study should be about 17m² (183 ft²) each; the entire house should be approximately 220m² (2,368 ft²)
Office: family use
Guests per year: 1
Open or closed architecture: closed
Traditional or modern design: modern
Open kitchen, kitchen island – no open kitchen, but yes to a kitchen island
Number of dining seats – 6
Fireplace – yes
Music/stereo wall – TV wall
Balcony, roof terrace – balcony
Garage, carport – large garage
Additional wishes/special features/daily routines, preferably with reasons why certain things should or should not be included – everyone should be able to sleep as undisturbed as possible in their bedrooms, even if other family members are awake. The husband is sometimes up as early as 4 a.m. Otherwise, watching TV in the evening should be possible without disturbing those sleeping upstairs.
House design
Who created the design:
- Architect (freelancer for a general contractor)
What do you like most? Why?
The upper floor with well-sized rooms and the location of the rooms exactly where they should be (only the washroom area we would still like to move to the outer right corner so that you don’t have to pass it every time you use the toilet). On the ground floor, the access through an airlock, the kitchen, and the dining area with the study next to it are especially liked.
Also appreciated is that after adjustments, the study now faces the garden instead of the street.
What don’t you like? Why?
We originally wanted the distance from wall to wall where the sofa and TV stand is to be about 6.40m (21 ft) (large screen & surround system), but so far only 5.69m (19 ft) has been realized.
Laundry room as described.
Kitchen larger in square meters than needed; the approx. 3m² (32 ft²) could theoretically be used well in the living area.
Price estimate according to architect/planner:
720,000 euros (including construction incidentals)
Personal price limit for the house, including equipment:
800,000 euros
Preferred heating technology:
Gas
If you have to give up on something, which details/features can you do without?
- Can do without:
Technical systems like controlled residential ventilation
- Cannot do without:
Space (except for the kitchen)
Why is the design the way it is now? For example:
Is this a standard design from the planner?
The architect has largely implemented our wishes; the only issue is the living room situation.
What makes it particularly good or bad in your opinion?
Patient, quick to implement, has already gotten to know us well.
No negative points.
Do you notice any other points that might not fit or that we should consider, which we might have overlooked?
In the basement, the room currently labeled as home cinema might possibly be used as one medium- to long-term. For the foreseeable future, it will be a storage room.
We have already gone through several plans with our architect and I think we are almost there, about to start the detailed planning phase. Before that, I’m looking forward to getting feedback from other users.
Development plan/restrictions: §34 – two full stories
Plot size: 1,085m² (1,1679 yd²)
Basement, floors – 2 full stories plus partial basement
Number of people, ages – 3 people (37, 34, 1, second child planned)
Space requirements on ground floor and upper floor – the requirement was that bedrooms and the study should be about 17m² (183 ft²) each; the entire house should be approximately 220m² (2,368 ft²)
Office: family use
Guests per year: 1
Open or closed architecture: closed
Traditional or modern design: modern
Open kitchen, kitchen island – no open kitchen, but yes to a kitchen island
Number of dining seats – 6
Fireplace – yes
Music/stereo wall – TV wall
Balcony, roof terrace – balcony
Garage, carport – large garage
Additional wishes/special features/daily routines, preferably with reasons why certain things should or should not be included – everyone should be able to sleep as undisturbed as possible in their bedrooms, even if other family members are awake. The husband is sometimes up as early as 4 a.m. Otherwise, watching TV in the evening should be possible without disturbing those sleeping upstairs.
House design
Who created the design:
- Architect (freelancer for a general contractor)
What do you like most? Why?
The upper floor with well-sized rooms and the location of the rooms exactly where they should be (only the washroom area we would still like to move to the outer right corner so that you don’t have to pass it every time you use the toilet). On the ground floor, the access through an airlock, the kitchen, and the dining area with the study next to it are especially liked.
Also appreciated is that after adjustments, the study now faces the garden instead of the street.
What don’t you like? Why?
We originally wanted the distance from wall to wall where the sofa and TV stand is to be about 6.40m (21 ft) (large screen & surround system), but so far only 5.69m (19 ft) has been realized.
Laundry room as described.
Kitchen larger in square meters than needed; the approx. 3m² (32 ft²) could theoretically be used well in the living area.
Price estimate according to architect/planner:
720,000 euros (including construction incidentals)
Personal price limit for the house, including equipment:
800,000 euros
Preferred heating technology:
Gas
If you have to give up on something, which details/features can you do without?
- Can do without:
Technical systems like controlled residential ventilation
- Cannot do without:
Space (except for the kitchen)
Why is the design the way it is now? For example:
Is this a standard design from the planner?
The architect has largely implemented our wishes; the only issue is the living room situation.
What makes it particularly good or bad in your opinion?
Patient, quick to implement, has already gotten to know us well.
No negative points.
Do you notice any other points that might not fit or that we should consider, which we might have overlooked?
In the basement, the room currently labeled as home cinema might possibly be used as one medium- to long-term. For the foreseeable future, it will be a storage room.
R
R.Hotzenplotz22 Jul 2017 23:47They suggested planning the basement only beneath the stairs—a partial basement. If you want more space, then from a cost perspective, a full basement is the only reasonable option.
Unfortunately, I’m at work right now and have the calculations
I don’t find it bad at all. I mostly like it quite a lot. Off the top of my head, the following points come to mind, apart from the somewhat dull exterior appearance, that would need to be considered:
1) The bedroom looks grand and nicely central on the upper floor. However, the old design had the advantage that the partner who gets up early could leave the sleeping area immediately in the morning, shower, get dressed, and not have to enter the bedroom again at all. In this design, you always have to walk through the bedroom, which disturbs the sleeping partner. In its current form, that would be a deal breaker. We have very different sleeping times and daily routines. The architect’s design took this into account.
2) Do we have a cloakroom there? Or just a wardrobe in front of the stairs?
3) The pantry could probably still be integrated with the kitchen.
4) I’m not sure at the moment whether the living and dining area will work or if it will feel too angular or boxy in reality. Without measurements, everything is difficult to judge. What I do like, though, is the much quicker connection from the study to the bathroom. The kitchen/dining access is of course much better here.
If we do end up having to rethink everything or need major adjustments, this proposal definitely provides good inspiration! Many thanks for that!
We don’t know yet how things will continue. I had written that ideally, we would like to build exactly as the architect planned—that’s what I posted second to last. That was final for us, and we were already very attached to it. That things turned out differently due to structural engineering and other factors calls the previous room program into question, at least to some extent. I just meant that it’s probably better to first come up with a final room program again and only then plan details like bathrooms, the kitchen, etc. Of course, certain things need to be kept in mind—for example, a kitchen island doesn’t fit in every layout.
I guess there was maybe just some misunderstanding.
Your statement that we don’t want to change the basic layout anymore is absolutely correct. But reality might have caught up with us. It is possible that manageable changes could fix this. But it’s also quite possible that necessary adjustments—like so often—lead to other consequences, and suddenly there’s no coherent design left. Even shortening the house could have that effect. I might not be able to only shorten on the left side and not the right without ruining symmetry and the exterior appearance. There might be a bit of room to shorten on the left, but probably not on the right. These are the questions running through my mind. In the end, I need a workable room program, not just one that looks great on paper but can never be realized.
The latest design (the one we didn’t approve) that included the 3D visualization had a strange cabinet next to the fireplace. That was also a structural issue. I said that’s not acceptable. It should either be a small, subtle fireplace or none at all. Definitely not such a bulky cabinet.
After taking some time to process the bad news, I plan to sit down calmly tomorrow.
I’ve suggested to the company that the architect include me in the next session so I can be at the computer while the plans are drawn. Otherwise, this will drag on over 5-6 meetings and just as many weeks... I’d rather take a day off and work through as much as possible in one go.
Unfortunately, I’m at work right now and have the calculations
kaho674 schrieb:
Here’s another quick sketch. Well, at this time of day, ideas are running out. Classic – standard – boring. But sometimes you can still spot something useful. Otherwise, trash. Good night.
I don’t find it bad at all. I mostly like it quite a lot. Off the top of my head, the following points come to mind, apart from the somewhat dull exterior appearance, that would need to be considered:
1) The bedroom looks grand and nicely central on the upper floor. However, the old design had the advantage that the partner who gets up early could leave the sleeping area immediately in the morning, shower, get dressed, and not have to enter the bedroom again at all. In this design, you always have to walk through the bedroom, which disturbs the sleeping partner. In its current form, that would be a deal breaker. We have very different sleeping times and daily routines. The architect’s design took this into account.
2) Do we have a cloakroom there? Or just a wardrobe in front of the stairs?
3) The pantry could probably still be integrated with the kitchen.
4) I’m not sure at the moment whether the living and dining area will work or if it will feel too angular or boxy in reality. Without measurements, everything is difficult to judge. What I do like, though, is the much quicker connection from the study to the bathroom. The kitchen/dining access is of course much better here.
If we do end up having to rethink everything or need major adjustments, this proposal definitely provides good inspiration! Many thanks for that!
Maria16 schrieb:
By the way, I was surprised by the statement that you need a room program first. All I took from reading was that you don’t want to change the basic layout anymore.
We don’t know yet how things will continue. I had written that ideally, we would like to build exactly as the architect planned—that’s what I posted second to last. That was final for us, and we were already very attached to it. That things turned out differently due to structural engineering and other factors calls the previous room program into question, at least to some extent. I just meant that it’s probably better to first come up with a final room program again and only then plan details like bathrooms, the kitchen, etc. Of course, certain things need to be kept in mind—for example, a kitchen island doesn’t fit in every layout.
I guess there was maybe just some misunderstanding.
Your statement that we don’t want to change the basic layout anymore is absolutely correct. But reality might have caught up with us. It is possible that manageable changes could fix this. But it’s also quite possible that necessary adjustments—like so often—lead to other consequences, and suddenly there’s no coherent design left. Even shortening the house could have that effect. I might not be able to only shorten on the left side and not the right without ruining symmetry and the exterior appearance. There might be a bit of room to shorten on the left, but probably not on the right. These are the questions running through my mind. In the end, I need a workable room program, not just one that looks great on paper but can never be realized.
Maria16 schrieb:
Speaking of the table: Won’t the passage next to the fireplace be a bit tight?
The latest design (the one we didn’t approve) that included the 3D visualization had a strange cabinet next to the fireplace. That was also a structural issue. I said that’s not acceptable. It should either be a small, subtle fireplace or none at all. Definitely not such a bulky cabinet.
After taking some time to process the bad news, I plan to sit down calmly tomorrow.
I’ve suggested to the company that the architect include me in the next session so I can be at the computer while the plans are drawn. Otherwise, this will drag on over 5-6 meetings and just as many weeks... I’d rather take a day off and work through as much as possible in one go.
T
Traumfaenger23 Jul 2017 00:14R.Hotzenplotz schrieb:
At least we can control the costs by giving up the hobby room in the basement, making the rooms smaller there, and building only a partial basement. From our experience, a partial basement is not significantly cheaper than a full basement because the structural engineering is more complex with a partial basement. For us, it wasn’t worth it—much less space but hardly any cost savings.
11ant schrieb:
In my opinion, that doesn’t justify getting an amateur as an architect. I agree, there are really experienced architects in Cologne for the style you want, with solid references. Not that I want to defend the architect from your construction company, but the really good professionals on the market work independently.
Climbee schrieb:
If I’m investing that much money, I would definitely hold the construction company’s feet to the fire if they only offer me some low-grade architect. I feel the same way! With that kind of budget, amateurs shouldn’t be experimenting!
R.Hotzenplotz schrieb:
It can also be a spiral staircase. Not ideal, but it would be an option. However, several users throughout this thread said that for a house like this there is no other suitable staircase than a straight one, or that a straight staircase fits perfectly with our floor plan. A straight staircase is great, but a slightly more space-saving staircase with a landing of suitable width also feels very generous. It’s worth presenting alternatives to the space-consuming straight staircase.
R.Hotzenplotz schrieb:
A partial basement. If you want more than that, then financially only a full basement makes sense. I completely agree, see above!
Traumfaenger schrieb:
A straight staircase is great, but a landing staircase with appropriate width, which saves a bit of space, also feels very spacious. The idea here is to present alternatives to the space-consuming straight staircase.I would be cautious about that. In my opinion, the landing staircase is not more space-saving than the straight one. Rather the opposite. Generous staircases tend to quickly enlarge the house, which offers a big potential to save space but also adds a luxury factor.Here is a bit of experimentation. I resized the living room to remove any corners. However, this already makes it quite large. I’m not sure about the exact floor area here—my software doesn’t provide that. I entered the exterior dimensions as a reference. These can always be used well to relate to the initial design for comparing sizes. However, I could not find the original exterior dimensions.
One should not be distracted by the exterior view. Unfortunately, my software does not support Bauhaus style either.
You would have to decide between a pantry or an additional cloakroom. I prefer a pantry—which can of course be easily integrated into the kitchen. The wardrobe by the staircase is still 2.50 m (8 ft 2 in) wide. It fits quite a bit, and the closet in the original design was far from that large. I still kept it as a cloakroom, because in my opinion, the kitchen is also large enough.
R.Hotzenplotz schrieb:
I suggested to the company that the architect include me in the next session so I can sit directly at the computer while things are being drawn. Otherwise, it will end up taking 5-6 meetings and just as many weeks… I’d rather take a day off and work through as much as possible then. Great idea. I would do the same and bring my partner along as well. That way, you can gather ideas together.
R
R.Hotzenplotz23 Jul 2017 09:08kaho674 schrieb:
The chimney in the living room is a problem. How about integrating it into the office or bathroom? Also in the architect’s plan, I mean. Of course, that only works with a flat roof at this spot.The fireplace was originally intended to serve as a visual room divider between the living and dining areas in an open-plan living room. We are already considering doing without it because it adds significant cost. We would probably prefer that rather than having it awkwardly placed at the edge of the room.
I don’t like the strict separation between the bathroom, dressing room, and bedroom at all—especially the dressing room that you have to pass through the bathroom to reach. The idea of accessing the entire master area through one door is better. The rooms just need to be arranged so that the sleeping area is either in the left or right corner, as originally planned.
For now, I’m going to take a break. Today, I’ll sit down calmly with the existing documents and thoughts from here and make some notes.
Similar topics