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?
Here I have an L-shaped house with a balcony as a secondary element. You need to imagine a few support posts underneath, which I quickly left out.
The garage was removed in favor of two parking spaces. A carport might be possible.
I also really like the lighting in the upstairs hallway here. It’s visually a real highlight, in my opinion.
The garage was removed in favor of two parking spaces. A carport might be possible.
I also really like the lighting in the upstairs hallway here. It’s visually a real highlight, in my opinion.
Hello everyone, thank you very much for the many tips and suggestions. Some answers are below.
We have revised the floor plan again (at least the interior walls and a bit of the exterior). We are much more satisfied with it now, but of course I’m still interested in your opinions. Pictures are attached. Since I don’t have an architectural software, it was planned in SketchUp. Doors and such can therefore only be seen in the angled top view.
The kitchen was not properly drawn in that layout. It should be understood more schematically now. I have made the bay window larger, so now the table fits crosswise.
The note about a possible exception in the development plan is very good. Otherwise, we didn’t want a gable roof because of photovoltaics but for aesthetic reasons. Mono-pitch and pyramid roofs are unfortunately not options for us.
At least we have done the reengineering inside so far — different staircase, changed layout on the upper floor, and mostly in the basement. It feels significantly more tidy and clear.
There is about 2m (6.5 ft) space behind the car; the idea was to park the bikes either in front or behind the car (we used to do it this way). Isn’t 3m (10 ft) standard for a garage? Lawn mowers and such will go into the basement; there is an outside staircase for that.
The garage can be built up to 3m (10 ft) from the street, that was planned but is not yet shown in the plan.
Since the neighboring plot is equally narrow, I expect the neighbor’s house will be quite close as well, so there won’t be much evening sun anyway. On the other hand, there is a large plot on the east side where I expect more distance, so the view is more likely to be in that direction.
Thank you very much for the effort you put into the plans! What software do you use?
The living room is wider now, as well as the bay window, and less space is wasted. We definitely like it better now, also thanks to the many suggestions here. What do you think about the new design?
We have revised the floor plan again (at least the interior walls and a bit of the exterior). We are much more satisfied with it now, but of course I’m still interested in your opinions. Pictures are attached. Since I don’t have an architectural software, it was planned in SketchUp. Doors and such can therefore only be seen in the angled top view.
ypg schrieb:
The more I look at the open-plan area, the less I like it. It seems so unplanned right at the entrance with half the kitchen area there.
If it’s going to stay somewhat like this, I would at least move the kitchen into the bay window, so a conservatory, and make the dining area the central part of the house.
The kitchen was not properly drawn in that layout. It should be understood more schematically now. I have made the bay window larger, so now the table fits crosswise.
11ant schrieb:
Exactly, and any experienced reader of development plans immediately thinks of building a straight-walled upper floor instead of the knee wall 180° pitched roof attic and covering it with either a 22° roof pitch (analogous to the maximum in front pitch/side pitch) or for example a 27° roof pitch.
[...] nonsense then gets squeezed by a gable roof for photovoltaics along with a front-runner’s obedience to the development plan that chops the upper floor into a knee wall attic.
[...]
Therefore, my advice is: don’t get attached to any random uncoded detail, but redesign everything. Reengineering doesn’t mean eliminating every match to the old plan— what happens to align again by coincidence may stay (just not what stays by preservation).
The note about a possible exception in the development plan is very good. Otherwise, we didn’t want a gable roof because of photovoltaics but for aesthetic reasons. Mono-pitch and pyramid roofs are unfortunately not options for us.
At least we have done the reengineering inside so far — different staircase, changed layout on the upper floor, and mostly in the basement. It feels significantly more tidy and clear.
kaho674 schrieb:
I want to ask this again:
You have a 16m (52.5 ft) wide plot with a maximum house width of 11m (36 ft). You’ve planned a narrow prefabricated garage under 3m (10 ft) wide and 7m (23 ft) long as a garage. If the family car actually parks there, I’m really worried. Where will bicycles, scooters, tricycles, lawnmowers and the like fit for 5 people? Or are two parking spaces in front of the house planned and the garage is just for storage?
There is about 2m (6.5 ft) space behind the car; the idea was to park the bikes either in front or behind the car (we used to do it this way). Isn’t 3m (10 ft) standard for a garage? Lawn mowers and such will go into the basement; there is an outside staircase for that.
RomeoZwo schrieb:
Is the garage allowed to be built directly on the street? The rule requiring at least 5m (16 ft) distance from the street doesn’t seem to apply (your current plan shows 4m (13 ft)). Of course, it may be that the garage must comply with the building line.
I wouldn’t block the west side with the evening sun, so I’d put the garage rather in the northeast. As an option maybe a double carport directly on the street in the northeast corner, with a storage space for bikes behind half of the boundary, and then the house further inside the plot?
[ATTACH alt="Bild1.jpg"]41683[/ATTACH]
The garage can be built up to 3m (10 ft) from the street, that was planned but is not yet shown in the plan.
Since the neighboring plot is equally narrow, I expect the neighbor’s house will be quite close as well, so there won’t be much evening sun anyway. On the other hand, there is a large plot on the east side where I expect more distance, so the view is more likely to be in that direction.
kaho674 schrieb:
Well, I’m not so sure. It’s neither fish nor fowl. The narrow living room, the kitchen lost somehow in the room, the worm-shaped extension in the south, the kids’ room 2 so annoyingly narrow upstairs, no space for the car, bicycles & co, and all for 580K???
Okay, the plot is tricky. It should actually be 2m (6.5 ft) wider for your wishes. If it were mine, I would bury some of those ideas and build a rectangle.
It would look like this (north is at the bottom):
[ATTACH alt="EG.jpg"]41698[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH alt="OG.jpg"]41697[/ATTACH]
Maybe I would move slightly south for a small front garden. Photovoltaics also work with east-west orientation — I just learned that. Kids get the south side. Why do you have to look into the garden while sleeping?
Thank you very much for the effort you put into the plans! What software do you use?
The living room is wider now, as well as the bay window, and less space is wasted. We definitely like it better now, also thanks to the many suggestions here. What do you think about the new design?
3 m (10 feet) is tight for a garage. Most cars, including side mirrors, are already over 2 m (6.5 feet) wide.
Then you still want bicycles to pass without causing scratches?
Getting in and out is only possible on one side; the rest must stay outside.
Regarding the dining area in the bay window,
just Google "space requirements for dining table."
Then you still want bicycles to pass without causing scratches?
Getting in and out is only possible on one side; the rest must stay outside.
Regarding the dining area in the bay window,
just Google "space requirements for dining table."
I’m having trouble understanding the plans. I don’t see the advantage of the new bay window design.
With 3.70 meters (12 feet) you can fit a 2-meter (6.5 feet) table. So what kind of seating area is this now? What will happen in the living room “corner”?
Honestly? It looks like it’s trying too hard and doesn’t work. The good money is slipping away. At 560,000 I would hire an architect. The builder can handle the construction. That way, the children’s rooms will turn out well, and the open plan area will have functional zones.
With 3.70 meters (12 feet) you can fit a 2-meter (6.5 feet) table. So what kind of seating area is this now? What will happen in the living room “corner”?
Honestly? It looks like it’s trying too hard and doesn’t work. The good money is slipping away. At 560,000 I would hire an architect. The builder can handle the construction. That way, the children’s rooms will turn out well, and the open plan area will have functional zones.
haydee schrieb:
3 m (10 feet) is tight for a garage. Most cars, including the outside mirrors, are already over 2 m (6.5 feet) wide.
And you still want bikes to pass by without causing scratches?
You can only get in on one side; the rest has to stay outside.
Regarding the dining area in the bay window:
Just search for dining table space requirements.The garage size works. No one needs to pass by if the car is inside. I’m only familiar with getting in and out from outside in such cases.
The dining area fits in terms of space (8 seats without chairs on the end wall; the current layout doesn’t quite show this correctly). So a 240 cm (95 inches) table...
ypg schrieb:
I can’t make sense of these plans. I don’t see the advantage of the new bay window shape.
A 2 m (6.5 feet) table fits in 3.70 m (12.1 feet). What kind of seating corner is this? What happens in the living room “corner”?
Honestly? It looks forced rather than skillful. The good money is going to waste. If I had 560,000, I would hire an architect. The builder can do the construction. Then you’d also get good children’s rooms, and the open-plan area would have sensible zones.The armchairs aren’t correctly positioned yet. The entire right side is the living room, with the TV corner at the back, but this is intentionally not the focal point of the living room.
I actually find the children’s rooms quite good for the available space. What do you find troubling about the latest design?
Similar topics