ᐅ Single-family home, approximately 160 m², Bauhaus style; first design draft based on our requirements
Created on: 23 Aug 2019 22:03
N
Notstrom
Hello everyone,
we've been looking forward to this for a long time, and now we can finally share our first draft floor plan/design for discussion. We’re very curious to hear your feedback.
Those of you who have seen my thread before (https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/efh-Bauhausstil-Wohnfläche-180m-mit-Doppelgarage.31853/) know what to expect, and here comes the gem.
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 530m² (about 5,700 sq ft)
Slope: No
Site coverage ratio (Grundflächenzahl): see screenshot
Floor area ratio (Geschossflächenzahl): see screenshot
Building envelope, building line, and boundaries: see screenshot
Edge development: see screenshot
Number of parking spaces: double garage
Number of floors: 2
Roof style: flat roof
Architectural style: Bauhaus
Orientation
Maximum height/limitations
Other requirements
The green highlighted area represents our plot => Parcel 8479
Homeowner Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: Bauhaus style, flat roof
Basement, floors: Basement yes, ground floor, upper floor
Number of residents, ages: 3 people, potentially 4: 33, 30, 2 years old
Space requirements on ground and upper floors: Initially planned 180 m² (about 1,940 sq ft) on two stories, now reduced to 160 m² (about 1,720 sq ft) after feedback, with the ground floor slightly larger than the upper floor, around 75–85 m² (810–915 sq ft)
Office: Family use or home office? Yes, in the basement (guest room <-> office)
Overnight guests per year: Hard to say, probably about 10 times per year with 2–5 guests each time
Open or closed architecture: Rather open
Conservative or modern construction: Rather modern
Open kitchen, cooking island: Island
Number of dining spaces: 1
Fireplace: Yes
Music/sound system wall: Our soundbar is sufficient
Balcony, roof terrace: Maybe, undecided (Architect’s comment: How often do you really go out for a beer on the balcony/roof terrace instead of the nice terrace on the ground floor?)
Garage, carport: Double garage, possibly single garage with carport
Kitchen garden, greenhouse: Small but nice (a few tomatoes, cucumbers, zucchinis…)
House Design
Planning by: Architect
What do you particularly like? Why? We like the architecture with the two offset rectangles, though we wonder if the extra cost (no price estimate yet) justifies this. We believe it is structurally more challenging than a simple "cube."
What don’t you like? Why? The size of the bedroom/walk-in closet/children’s room. It feels like the bedroom is missing 2–5 m² (about 20–55 sq ft), as is the second children’s room.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: The initial draft was around 550,000 EUR
Personal price limit for the house, including fixtures: 620,000 EUR
Preferred heating technology: Indifferent, but tendency toward heat pump.
If you had to give up something, which details/finishes
- You can give up: the current shape (nice but a cube would also do)
- You cannot give up: space
Why is the design the way it is now? For example:
Standard design from the planner? This is the second design resulting from last week’s discussion with us, and we find it very successful.
Which wishes were implemented by the architect? Absolutely, plus the idea he had to move the kitchen during development. The guest room has now moved to the basement, allowing more space on the ground floor (beforehand, it felt quite cramped and “squeezed”).
What makes it especially good or bad in your opinion? The architecture
...and now I’ll leave you alone with our house
Upper floor plan:
Basement:
we've been looking forward to this for a long time, and now we can finally share our first draft floor plan/design for discussion. We’re very curious to hear your feedback.
Those of you who have seen my thread before (https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/efh-Bauhausstil-Wohnfläche-180m-mit-Doppelgarage.31853/) know what to expect, and here comes the gem.
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 530m² (about 5,700 sq ft)
Slope: No
Site coverage ratio (Grundflächenzahl): see screenshot
Floor area ratio (Geschossflächenzahl): see screenshot
Building envelope, building line, and boundaries: see screenshot
Edge development: see screenshot
Number of parking spaces: double garage
Number of floors: 2
Roof style: flat roof
Architectural style: Bauhaus
Orientation
Maximum height/limitations
Other requirements
The green highlighted area represents our plot => Parcel 8479
Homeowner Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: Bauhaus style, flat roof
Basement, floors: Basement yes, ground floor, upper floor
Number of residents, ages: 3 people, potentially 4: 33, 30, 2 years old
Space requirements on ground and upper floors: Initially planned 180 m² (about 1,940 sq ft) on two stories, now reduced to 160 m² (about 1,720 sq ft) after feedback, with the ground floor slightly larger than the upper floor, around 75–85 m² (810–915 sq ft)
Office: Family use or home office? Yes, in the basement (guest room <-> office)
Overnight guests per year: Hard to say, probably about 10 times per year with 2–5 guests each time
Open or closed architecture: Rather open
Conservative or modern construction: Rather modern
Open kitchen, cooking island: Island
Number of dining spaces: 1
Fireplace: Yes
Music/sound system wall: Our soundbar is sufficient
Balcony, roof terrace: Maybe, undecided (Architect’s comment: How often do you really go out for a beer on the balcony/roof terrace instead of the nice terrace on the ground floor?)
Garage, carport: Double garage, possibly single garage with carport
Kitchen garden, greenhouse: Small but nice (a few tomatoes, cucumbers, zucchinis…)
House Design
Planning by: Architect
What do you particularly like? Why? We like the architecture with the two offset rectangles, though we wonder if the extra cost (no price estimate yet) justifies this. We believe it is structurally more challenging than a simple "cube."
What don’t you like? Why? The size of the bedroom/walk-in closet/children’s room. It feels like the bedroom is missing 2–5 m² (about 20–55 sq ft), as is the second children’s room.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: The initial draft was around 550,000 EUR
Personal price limit for the house, including fixtures: 620,000 EUR
Preferred heating technology: Indifferent, but tendency toward heat pump.
If you had to give up something, which details/finishes
- You can give up: the current shape (nice but a cube would also do)
- You cannot give up: space
Why is the design the way it is now? For example:
Standard design from the planner? This is the second design resulting from last week’s discussion with us, and we find it very successful.
Which wishes were implemented by the architect? Absolutely, plus the idea he had to move the kitchen during development. The guest room has now moved to the basement, allowing more space on the ground floor (beforehand, it felt quite cramped and “squeezed”).
What makes it especially good or bad in your opinion? The architecture
...and now I’ll leave you alone with our house
Upper floor plan:
Basement:
The difference compared to this one here isn’t that big anymore, right? And here the staircase has a landing. The only difference is that the entrance is next to the garage—for shorter paths and less paved area.
Also, the poor child doesn’t have to sleep right next to the parents’ bedroom. Whether the access is moved through the walk-in closet or the bed is rotated, it’s a minor detail.
If you skip the landing, of course, you save some space.
kaho674 schrieb:
Also, the poor child doesn’t have to sleep right next to the parents’ bedroom. Whether the access is moved through the walk-in closet or the bed is rotated, it’s a minor detail.
If you skip the landing, of course, you save some space.
kaho674 schrieb:
Only the entrance is next to the garage – for shorter distance and less sealed surface area.I also think that works better for you. The bedroom seems to be designed that way to allow access to the bathroom. I would leave that out. A bathroom with two doors is unnecessary and impractical.
- I’m not sure how strong the desire for a T-shaped bathroom is, but I would advise against it. We decided against a T-shaped bathroom with similar dimensions. The bathroom feels bright and spacious that way. If I think about having a shower and a wall of that depth in front of my sink, the impression of a “large” space would disappear. Between the bathtub and the sink, you’ll probably have at most 80cm (31.5 inches). Also, consider that you won’t be able to comfortably pull out drawers under the vanity cabinet.
- The vestibule is simply unusable due to its size and the door swing. You’ll need to come up with a different solution.
In the rest of the floor plan, there seem to be too many corners and niches. Why? This could probably be organized more efficiently.
Ultimately, though, it has to be to your liking!
- The vestibule is simply unusable due to its size and the door swing. You’ll need to come up with a different solution.
In the rest of the floor plan, there seem to be too many corners and niches. Why? This could probably be organized more efficiently.
Ultimately, though, it has to be to your liking!
J
j.bautsch3 Sep 2019 08:37Zaba12 schrieb:
- I'm not sure how strong the desire for a T-shaped bathroom is, but I would avoid it. I fully agree, especially since the shower will definitely need a door, otherwise everyone entering the bathroom after someone has just showered will end up with wet feet... it also makes the space look smaller and less airy.
By the way, if you are planning a central controlled ventilation system for the living area, ask your architect where they intend to run the ventilation ducts from the utility basement upwards. You need to allow a space of 70cm x 25cm (28 x 10 inches) from the basement ceiling/ground floor slab up to the upper floor ceiling for the installation. So, good luck with finding the space.
Solution for the upper floor: There is still an installation level in front of the bathtub = even less space for the ventilation ducts.
Solution for the ground floor: Plan a kids’ or guest toilet that is 25cm (10 inches) narrower than the current one.
Solution for the upper floor: There is still an installation level in front of the bathtub = even less space for the ventilation ducts.
Solution for the ground floor: Plan a kids’ or guest toilet that is 25cm (10 inches) narrower than the current one.
11ant schrieb:
From the "architect"? ? ? – I strongly dislike the spatial feeling: when you enter the walk-in closet and immediately turn sharply (almost as if slipping through a wormhole into another galaxy), you suddenly find yourself in a recess that fits a double bed. Formally (the bed fits, and you can walk there too) it qualifies perfectly as a "bedroom," but architecturally it is clearly the kind of room you would at best assign to the (unpleasant) mother-in-law. What exactly does the architect do professionally again? – I still consider him just a permit drawer, meaning a structural engineer who thinks of "Bauhaus" as the specialty store for bathroom mirrors and roof battens.Dear 11ant, I respect your rhetoric and eloquence, but: how can we bridge this walk-in closet layout, which you architecturally recommend as suitable for the mother-in-law, with the upper floor? I mean, I find your comments worth reading and partly amusing, but we can’t really benefit from your experience here.
ypg schrieb:
Stairs: not a landing, but mirror the layout and extend the first steps in the hallway by about two steps. Provides more comfort.
I would even remove this cross wall between the stairs and dining area.Oh, we hadn’t noticed that—good point about the stair approach. Why not a stair landing?
ypg schrieb:
I also think that’s better for you.
The bedroom was probably designed this way to allow access to the bathroom. I would remove that. You don’t need a bathroom with two doors. It’s also impractical.Just to clarify: why is that impractical? Do I understand 11ant correctly that, in their opinion, the passage to the bedroom is simply too narrow?
Zaba12 schrieb:
- I don’t know how strong the desire is for a T-shaped bathroom, but I would advise against it. We decided against a T-shaped bathroom with similar dimensions. The bathroom feels bright and spacious because of it. If I imagine having a shower and a wall of that depth in front of my sink, the “large” impression would be lost. You’ll have at most 80cm (31.5 inches) between the bathtub and the sink. Think about it: you won’t be able to comfortably open the drawers under the vanity.Good point, that means either I make the bathroom larger or I redesign it. The 80cm (31.5 inches) between bathtub and sink actually bothers me – I just measured the distance in our current bathroom, it’s 90cm (35.5 inches), and I don’t find that tight.
Zaba12 schrieb:
- The entrance area (vestibule) is simply unusable due to its size and the door opening. You need to come up with something else.What do you mean exactly? Why is it unusable due to size and door opening? We want an entrance area particularly because:
- To take off shoes, keep dirt “outside,” and maintain privacy (postman, etc.)
Zaba12 schrieb:
In the rest of the floor plan, I just see too many corners, edges, and niches. Why? Surely this can be done more efficiently?Do you have examples?
Zaba12 schrieb:
By the way, if you’re planning a central mechanical ventilation system with heat recovery, ask your architect where they intend to run the ventilation ducts from the technical basement up, because you need to allow 70cm x 25cm (28 x 10 inches) of space from the ceiling of the basement/floor level of the ground floor up to the ceiling of the upper floor for installation. Good luck finding that space.
Upper floor solution: there is an installation space in front of the bathtub = even less room for the T layout
Ground floor solution: plan a child/guest toilet that is 25cm (10 inches) narrower than currently planned Good point – noted.
Similar topics