ᐅ Single-family house, 3 children's bedrooms, 2 bathrooms, approximately 10.5 x 10.5 meters (approximately 34.5 x 34.5 feet)
Created on: 7 Jan 2020 11:13
H
Holson!
Hello everyone,
we are currently planning a single-family house. We have a general contractor who is also handling the architectural design. The first proposal was quite standard and didn’t fully satisfy us, so we developed the plans further ourselves. Attached is the current version, and we would appreciate feedback especially on the location/type of the staircase and the living/dining area on the ground floor. All other information is below. Thank you very much!
Development plan/restrictions
Plot size: 511 m2 (5500 sq ft approx.)
Slope: minimal: 1 m (3.3 ft) elevation drop from west to east (over 16 m (52.5 ft))
Site coverage ratio: 0.35
Floor area ratio: 2 full floors
Building zone, building line and boundary: 2.5 m (8.2 ft) side clearance, 3 m (9.8 ft) to street
Edge development: Garage allowed
Number of parking spaces: 1.5
Number of floors: 2 full floors
Roof shape: Gable roof, 32° pitch
Style direction
Orientation: North/South, ridge line west/east
Maximum heights/limits: Max ridge height 7.50 m (24.6 ft)
Other requirements
Client requirements
Style, roof shape, building type
Basement, floors: Basement, 2 full floors
Number and age of occupants: 2 adults, 3 children (5, 3, 1)
Room needs, ground floor, upper floor: Ground floor: kitchen, dining area, living room, guest WC, guest room/office. Upper floor: master bedroom, 3 children’s rooms, 2 bathrooms
Office: Family use
Open kitchen, kitchen island
Number of dining seats: 8
Fireplace: yes
Balcony
Garage
Special features: bay window for dining area, upper floor: direct access to master bathroom from bedroom. Master bedroom facing garden, ideally 2 children’s rooms facing garden.
House design
Origin of the design:
- Planner of a general contractor
- Do-it-yourself
What do you particularly like? Why?
Basically all requirements are met; only the room proportions could be improved.
What do you dislike? Why?
Currently, there is a large open space between living and dining that is not used effectively.
Due to the current staircase layout and resulting passage to the living room, the TV area in the living room is somewhat narrow. Ideally, it should be about 4 m (13 ft) wide.
On the upper floor, access to the master bath is via a small corridor behind the stairs. Ideally, this “dead space” could be eliminated by a different staircase shape or positioning.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: approximately 560,000 (excluding land)
Personal price limit for the house, including fittings: 580,000
Preferred heating system: Gas condensing boiler
If you had to give up something, which details/extensions
-could you give up: 3 rooms facing the garden
-could you not give up: 2 bathrooms
Why has the design ended up like this? For example:
Design from planner adapted and further developed with our own ideas.
Basically, the requirements are met, but we do not yet find the room layouts ideal. The living room on the ground floor should be somewhat wider.
What is the most important/basic question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
Is the staircase appropriate in shape and placement? Can the living room be wider and the unused space between rooms on the ground floor smaller?
we are currently planning a single-family house. We have a general contractor who is also handling the architectural design. The first proposal was quite standard and didn’t fully satisfy us, so we developed the plans further ourselves. Attached is the current version, and we would appreciate feedback especially on the location/type of the staircase and the living/dining area on the ground floor. All other information is below. Thank you very much!
Development plan/restrictions
Plot size: 511 m2 (5500 sq ft approx.)
Slope: minimal: 1 m (3.3 ft) elevation drop from west to east (over 16 m (52.5 ft))
Site coverage ratio: 0.35
Floor area ratio: 2 full floors
Building zone, building line and boundary: 2.5 m (8.2 ft) side clearance, 3 m (9.8 ft) to street
Edge development: Garage allowed
Number of parking spaces: 1.5
Number of floors: 2 full floors
Roof shape: Gable roof, 32° pitch
Style direction
Orientation: North/South, ridge line west/east
Maximum heights/limits: Max ridge height 7.50 m (24.6 ft)
Other requirements
Client requirements
Style, roof shape, building type
Basement, floors: Basement, 2 full floors
Number and age of occupants: 2 adults, 3 children (5, 3, 1)
Room needs, ground floor, upper floor: Ground floor: kitchen, dining area, living room, guest WC, guest room/office. Upper floor: master bedroom, 3 children’s rooms, 2 bathrooms
Office: Family use
Open kitchen, kitchen island
Number of dining seats: 8
Fireplace: yes
Balcony
Garage
Special features: bay window for dining area, upper floor: direct access to master bathroom from bedroom. Master bedroom facing garden, ideally 2 children’s rooms facing garden.
House design
Origin of the design:
- Planner of a general contractor
- Do-it-yourself
What do you particularly like? Why?
Basically all requirements are met; only the room proportions could be improved.
What do you dislike? Why?
Currently, there is a large open space between living and dining that is not used effectively.
Due to the current staircase layout and resulting passage to the living room, the TV area in the living room is somewhat narrow. Ideally, it should be about 4 m (13 ft) wide.
On the upper floor, access to the master bath is via a small corridor behind the stairs. Ideally, this “dead space” could be eliminated by a different staircase shape or positioning.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: approximately 560,000 (excluding land)
Personal price limit for the house, including fittings: 580,000
Preferred heating system: Gas condensing boiler
If you had to give up something, which details/extensions
-could you give up: 3 rooms facing the garden
-could you not give up: 2 bathrooms
Why has the design ended up like this? For example:
Design from planner adapted and further developed with our own ideas.
Basically, the requirements are met, but we do not yet find the room layouts ideal. The living room on the ground floor should be somewhat wider.
What is the most important/basic question about the floor plan in 130 characters?
Is the staircase appropriate in shape and placement? Can the living room be wider and the unused space between rooms on the ground floor smaller?
Hello Katja,
What do you mean? The house is basically square. Or the garage on the other side?
The bay is quite important. What would you do better or differently here?
The staircase measures 176cm x 313.5cm (69 inches x 123.4 inches).
The floor-to-ceiling height (rough measurement) is 256cm (101 inches).
Thanks for the input
Manuel
kaho674 schrieb:
The plot is quite narrow. The garage is already annoyingly tight. Would it be an option for you to rotate the house (just the external dimensions)? Of course, the rooms would need to be adjusted accordingly.
What do you mean? The house is basically square. Or the garage on the other side?
kaho674 schrieb:
How important is the dining bay / sunroom?
What are the dimensions of the staircase and the floor-to-ceiling height? It’s hard to judge without numbers.
The bay is quite important. What would you do better or differently here?
The staircase measures 176cm x 313.5cm (69 inches x 123.4 inches).
The floor-to-ceiling height (rough measurement) is 256cm (101 inches).
Thanks for the input
Manuel
Hello Yvonne,
Unfortunately, I don’t have the original floor plans. It was a straight staircase, but positioned in the same way. Only one bathroom was planned, and it did not have direct access from the bedroom.
The bay window was intended to be there. Is there any reason against it?
It is the 4667 model... The building envelope/planning permission area is 16 x 16 m (52.5 x 52.5 ft). The square shape resulted from the floor plan so far. In theory, it could be longer, but that would also increase the cost—that was the main consideration. Also, the ridge beam would likely have to be rotated 90°, which would mean losing the southern orientation for photovoltaic panels and similar systems.
Thanks and best regards,
Manuel
ypg schrieb:
2.50 was mentioned.
I would be interested in the original floor plans. Is the staircase positioned the same way there?
And the bay window? It doesn’t have to be like that, does it?
And why the square shape?
Is it the 4667? What are the dimensions of the building envelope/planning permission area?
Unfortunately, I don’t have the original floor plans. It was a straight staircase, but positioned in the same way. Only one bathroom was planned, and it did not have direct access from the bedroom.
The bay window was intended to be there. Is there any reason against it?
It is the 4667 model... The building envelope/planning permission area is 16 x 16 m (52.5 x 52.5 ft). The square shape resulted from the floor plan so far. In theory, it could be longer, but that would also increase the cost—that was the main consideration. Also, the ridge beam would likely have to be rotated 90°, which would mean losing the southern orientation for photovoltaic panels and similar systems.
Thanks and best regards,
Manuel
Holson! schrieb:
The storey height (structural dimension) is 256cm (100.8 inches). No, the ceiling height was not meant. And if you are building with a standard ceiling height on the ground floor and two permitted full storeys with a knee wall height of 180cm (70.9 inches), I would consider a different roof design or applying for an exemption from the roof pitch: with an almost flat plot and a ridge height of 750cm (295.3 inches), I assume that the 32 to 42° roof pitch of the standard development plan is the cause. On the other hand, the 10 to 22° roof pitch allowed by the preliminary development plan offers good chances for obtaining an exemption.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
11ant schrieb:
Who suggested or requested a gable roof with a knee wall height of one point eighty meters (5 feet 11 inches)? Overall, the design looks to me like a basic pattern from about forty years ago, only adapted in details to current style trends. In other words: as a renovation, I would find it successful, but I would not build it like this as new construction. I recommend reengineering. Hello,
the request for the gable roof came from us, as only shed and pyramid roofs are allowed, and we don’t like those. Due to the maximum ridge height and the minimum roof pitch of 32° (32 degrees), the knee wall height results from that.
What exactly could or should be adapted to current tastes? Do you have some suggestions for me? The zoning plan is somewhat restrictive.
Where would you start with the reengineering? Interior layout? Exterior? Everything?
Thanks and best regards
Manuel
11ant schrieb:
No, the room height was not meant. And if you build with a standard ceiling height on the ground floor and two permitted full stories with a knee wall of 1.80 meters (5 feet 11 inches), I would consider a different roof design or applying for an exemption from the roof pitch: with an almost flat site and a ridge height of 7.50 meters (24 feet 7 inches), I assume the 32 to 42° roof pitch of the standard design is the cause. On the other hand, 10 to 22° roof pitch in the planned design provide good chances for an exemption. What was meant then? Our offer states, for example, "ground floor height." The ceiling thickness is 18 cm (7 inches).
Good tip regarding the exemption, thanks!
Holson! schrieb:
The bay window should definitely be included. What speaks against it? I don’t think the shape of the bay window works well here. You can see yourself: too much wasted space to the southwest, but for a bay window at the dining table.
How long is the building allowance now?
On a narrow plot, I wouldn’t squeeze a square house onto it; I’d rather plan something more elongated. That way, the outdoor space feels more open, instead of being as cramped as a terraced house.
Similar topics