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.Hotzenplotz21 Aug 2017 14:27kaho674 schrieb:
Sorry for the confusion. I just wanted to clarify that the possible glass wall by the staircase will likely remain the same or change only minimally.About 1.10 m (3.6 ft) less glass support.
R.Hotzenplotz schrieb:
About 1.10m (3.6 feet) less glass, that's all. Not at all. Whatever.
R
R.Hotzenplotz21 Aug 2017 15:20kaho674 schrieb:
Not at all. Whatever.It doesn't matter, the architect will visualize it anyway. Then I can imagine it.
R.Hotzenplotz schrieb:
Anyway, the architect will visualize it. Then I can imagine it.You really have a thing for visualization!
If you can’t picture it yourself – this and other aspects – then it hardly matters how it actually turns out later.
Visualizations always distort a perspective anyway and are certainly not a magic solution.
You are talking past each other due to the confusing use of the term “Antritt” (step entrance): in the case of a basement staircase, half of the participants are logically interpreting it as the exit (top).
A quarter-turn at the upper end of the staircase would technically solve the problem by allowing an early turn before the wall is too close. However, it would still have to end against this wall, meaning it would need to start "later" at the bottom; otherwise, there would be insufficient headroom. From the homeowner’s architectural perspective, and also in my opinion, this (which would then be a side exit when viewed in line with the upper stairs) would be aesthetically unacceptable and architecturally out of place.
A quarter-turn at the lower end would preserve the straight exit at the top facing the kitchen wall—but this would only be effective for the top if the lower run were moved forward accordingly (which is not feasible due to headroom constraints).
Sometimes I get the impression that with the increasing use of 3D visualizations, spatial imagination skills tend to decline.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
A quarter-turn at the upper end of the staircase would technically solve the problem by allowing an early turn before the wall is too close. However, it would still have to end against this wall, meaning it would need to start "later" at the bottom; otherwise, there would be insufficient headroom. From the homeowner’s architectural perspective, and also in my opinion, this (which would then be a side exit when viewed in line with the upper stairs) would be aesthetically unacceptable and architecturally out of place.
A quarter-turn at the lower end would preserve the straight exit at the top facing the kitchen wall—but this would only be effective for the top if the lower run were moved forward accordingly (which is not feasible due to headroom constraints).
Sometimes I get the impression that with the increasing use of 3D visualizations, spatial imagination skills tend to decline.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
R
R.Hotzenplotz21 Aug 2017 15:49In total, you don’t see an adequate solution for the problem; is that correct?
Similar topics