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?
Holson! schrieb:
What do you mean? The house is basically square. Or the garage on the other side? Okay, I thought it was a bit wider than deep.
Holson! schrieb:
The bay window is quite important. What would you improve or do differently here? Well, I don’t find it very successful. The space for the table is very tight—it feels cramped. For the money you’ve spent, you now have two areas that are too small for the table: the bay window is too narrow and the area between the kitchen and living room is also limited. It would be better to have one large area with enough space and freedom to move around.
Also, Child 2’s room doesn’t seem very impressive. How wide is the room? I generally don’t plan children's rooms under 2.75m (9 feet) width or try to avoid it. Is there a stove in that room? Don’t you think that’s a bad idea? Or is the dining area really that large?
The bedroom is big compared to the others. Good for you, but do you really need that much space? Wouldn’t it be better for the children to have more room?
Do you have any elevations? I still don’t fully understand the roof cutout.
Holson! schrieb:
The staircase measures 176cm x 313.5cm (69 inches x 123 inches).
The story height (rough dimension) is 256cm (101 inches).
Thanks for the input,
Manuel That must be the ceiling height. Then I guess the floor-to-floor height is about 285cm (112 inches). Well, with 15 risers that’s quite steep but still doable. What is that thing behind the first stair step? A closet? Where does the outdoor staircase lead? Is it necessary? If so, wouldn’t it be better the other way around?
Overall, I think it’s okay. The spaces just aren’t perfectly distributed. I would keep adjusting until it’s optimal. Like the TV viewing distance, children’s room width, space for the dining table, space for the car, and unnecessary corners in the entrance hall.
The more I look at the open-plan area, the less I like it. It already feels poorly planned at the entrance, with half of the kitchen area there.
If it has to stay somewhat as it is, I would at least move the kitchen into the bay window, meaning the conservatory, and make the dining area the main hub of the house.
If it has to stay somewhat as it is, I would at least move the kitchen into the bay window, meaning the conservatory, and make the dining area the main hub of the house.
Holson! schrieb:
The knee wall height results from the maximum ridge height and the minimum roof pitch (DN) of 32° (degrees). Exactly, and a more experienced reader of development plans will immediately think about building a vertical-walled upper floor instead of the knee wall at 180° roof pitch, and covering it with a roof pitch of either 22° (according to the maximum allowed for pitched roofs/semi-pitched roofs) or, for example, 27°.
Holson! schrieb:
What exactly could/should be adapted to current tastes? [...] Where would you start with reengineering? Interior floor plan? Exterior? Everything? Reengineering always means "wiping the slate clean and starting over." That does not imply that everything is bad – rather, that with every mere relaunch, there is a significant risk that unsatisfactory elements will persist in the “new” design’s DNA. Therefore: approach it radically from a blank sheet. Nothing should be adapted to current tastes at this point because, in my opinion, exactly that has already been done and has produced the current mess. I see here a Frankenstein’s hybrid of a suburban house basement from the oil heating era with an external staircase, and a ground floor like that under a displaced gable roof of a one-and-a-half story building from the same period on one hand; and above the top edge of the bay window sits an upper floor reminiscent of a replacement villa from the recent past decade. This nonsense gets even more confused by a gable roof intended for photovoltaic panels combined with an upper floor converted to a knee wall attic in anticipatory obedience to the building permit / planning permission. Whoever wants to bake a cake needs seven things – apparently, to maneuver a small house build into a planning dead end, four and a half things are enough.
That is why my advice is: don’t fall in love with any random, not-yet-compromised detail, but start all over. Reengineering does not mean that every similarity with the old plan must be eliminated – whatever by chance ends up the same as before may happily “stay” (just not what remains the same by retention).
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
I would like to ask the following again:
You have a 16m (52.5 feet) wide plot with a maximum house width of 11m (36 feet). You have planned a compact prefabricated garage that is less than 3m (10 feet) wide and 7m (23 feet) long. If the family car is actually parked in there, I’m very concerned. Where will bicycles, scooters, tricycles, lawnmowers, and other equipment for 5 people be stored? Or are two parking spaces planned in front of the house, and is the garage intended only for miscellaneous storage?
You have a 16m (52.5 feet) wide plot with a maximum house width of 11m (36 feet). You have planned a compact prefabricated garage that is less than 3m (10 feet) wide and 7m (23 feet) long. If the family car is actually parked in there, I’m very concerned. Where will bicycles, scooters, tricycles, lawnmowers, and other equipment for 5 people be stored? Or are two parking spaces planned in front of the house, and is the garage intended only for miscellaneous storage?
Is it allowed to build the garage directly next to the street? The rule that there must be at least 5m (16 ft) distance from the street doesn’t seem to apply (your plan currently shows 4m (13 ft)). Of course, it’s possible that the garage also has to comply with the building line in your case.
I wouldn’t want to block the west side with the evening sun, so I would prefer placing the garage in the northeast. As an option, maybe a double carport right next to the street in the northeast corner, with a storage room for bicycles behind the half of the border, and then the house set further back on the property?
I wouldn’t want to block the west side with the evening sun, so I would prefer placing the garage in the northeast. As an option, maybe a double carport right next to the street in the northeast corner, with a storage room for bicycles behind the half of the border, and then the house set further back on the property?
Well, I’m not quite sure. The layout is neither here nor there. The narrow living room, the kitchen lost in the space, the little extension to the south, the second children’s room upstairs being annoyingly narrow, no room for a car, bikes, and so on – and all that for 580K???
Okay, the plot is not simple. Ideally, it should be 2 meters wider (about 6.5 feet) to fit your needs. If it were mine, I would give up some of your ideas and build a simple rectangle.
It would look like this (top of plan is south):
I might also move the building slightly further south to create a small front garden. Photovoltaic panels work fine with an east-west orientation – I just found that out. The children should have the south side. Why do you need to look into the garden while sleeping?
Okay, the plot is not simple. Ideally, it should be 2 meters wider (about 6.5 feet) to fit your needs. If it were mine, I would give up some of your ideas and build a simple rectangle.
It would look like this (top of plan is south):
I might also move the building slightly further south to create a small front garden. Photovoltaic panels work fine with an east-west orientation – I just found that out. The children should have the south side. Why do you need to look into the garden while sleeping?
Similar topics