... at least that’s what the architects say in a building forum! However, I’m not sure if it’s just professional envy?! ... because I’ve also heard the opposite from friends. Mainly, they criticized the roof design, which is a standard model from our architect and often sold.
Dear forum members,
I would appreciate your feedback. All ideas and suggestions for improvement are welcome.
There are two of us and we plan to stay that way! We are designing a 1.5-story single-family house. The dimensions are 10.64 m x 10.94 m (35 ft x 36 ft) with a staggered gable roof. The lower roof has a 28-degree pitch, the higher one, under which the upper floor is located, has a 26-degree pitch with a 120 cm (47 inch) knee wall. The building is a typical model from the architect, but the floor plan can be freely designed. Windows are also not fixed.
Some explanations:
On the ground floor, there is a walk-in shower in the bathroom (the elongated one). The kitchen features a strip of windows. It is a large area with a big table and a counter.
What concerns me a bit is the bathroom: no shower is planned here intentionally, since we already have one on the ground floor. Still, perhaps we should consider a shower option in the bathtub?! I didn’t want a sloped bathtub, but rather a washbasin on a countertop that is somewhat longer. The line indicates the room height of 2 meters (6 ft 7 in).
Unfortunately, I cannot produce cross sections, so here are views from two compass directions.
In the entrance area, a small wardrobe is planned. Additionally, when guests come, all the coats and shoes should be stored in a closet (easy to access) in the study, since this room is rarely used anyway (until we can no longer manage the stairs due to age ;-))
A basement is not planned.
I look forward to your criticism and suggestions!
Yvonne
Dear forum members,
I would appreciate your feedback. All ideas and suggestions for improvement are welcome.
There are two of us and we plan to stay that way! We are designing a 1.5-story single-family house. The dimensions are 10.64 m x 10.94 m (35 ft x 36 ft) with a staggered gable roof. The lower roof has a 28-degree pitch, the higher one, under which the upper floor is located, has a 26-degree pitch with a 120 cm (47 inch) knee wall. The building is a typical model from the architect, but the floor plan can be freely designed. Windows are also not fixed.
Some explanations:
On the ground floor, there is a walk-in shower in the bathroom (the elongated one). The kitchen features a strip of windows. It is a large area with a big table and a counter.
What concerns me a bit is the bathroom: no shower is planned here intentionally, since we already have one on the ground floor. Still, perhaps we should consider a shower option in the bathtub?! I didn’t want a sloped bathtub, but rather a washbasin on a countertop that is somewhat longer. The line indicates the room height of 2 meters (6 ft 7 in).
Unfortunately, I cannot produce cross sections, so here are views from two compass directions.
In the entrance area, a small wardrobe is planned. Additionally, when guests come, all the coats and shoes should be stored in a closet (easy to access) in the study, since this room is rarely used anyway (until we can no longer manage the stairs due to age ;-))
A basement is not planned.
I look forward to your criticism and suggestions!
Yvonne
I’ve looked over the plans several times and, without being an architect, I’d say I would feel comfortable living in this house.
In my opinion, the layout feels spacious, and the rooms appear well-proportioned.
The only thing I would change is the basement level. I would like to reduce the size of the utility room a bit.
I’d place the toilet at the bottom of the plan (behind the door), then the washbasin at the top of the plan, and the shower to the right side of the plan.
In my view, this would have the advantage that guests wouldn’t have to walk through the whole house all the time.
In my opinion, the layout feels spacious, and the rooms appear well-proportioned.
The only thing I would change is the basement level. I would like to reduce the size of the utility room a bit.
I’d place the toilet at the bottom of the plan (behind the door), then the washbasin at the top of the plan, and the shower to the right side of the plan.
In my view, this would have the advantage that guests wouldn’t have to walk through the whole house all the time.
Hello Snow57, I don’t quite understand your suggestion regarding the toilet (I guess I’m a bit slow ;-).
The utility room will be reduced by 10cm (4 inches) to make the shower easier to access.
The architect has now drawn it up properly and, of course, adjusted the front with the windows. My "loopholes" now have reasonable dimensions and align with each other :-)
Unfortunately, the software distorts the views a bit... So, it won’t look as extreme as shown.
@Bauexperte, three skylights along the ridge would probably be ideal (I misunderstood you before, so forget about the “plants will compensate for that”). This applies especially to the ground floor, where, for example, the window band seems somehow lost to me.
The utility room will be reduced by 10cm (4 inches) to make the shower easier to access.
The architect has now drawn it up properly and, of course, adjusted the front with the windows. My "loopholes" now have reasonable dimensions and align with each other :-)
Unfortunately, the software distorts the views a bit... So, it won’t look as extreme as shown.
@Bauexperte, three skylights along the ridge would probably be ideal (I misunderstood you before, so forget about the “plants will compensate for that”). This applies especially to the ground floor, where, for example, the window band seems somehow lost to me.
Points I see:
- The exterior view is asymmetrical; the angle of the staggered roof doesn’t quite work.
- The window at the top of the shed roof looks like a solitary narrow slit; I would make it larger or plan for multiple windows there.
- On the upper floor, a large part of the square meters is used for a gallery that hardly anyone uses, while the bathroom is less than 10m² (108ft²), which is very small and almost like social housing standards.
- On the ground floor, I find the living room too small.
Overall, it is basically usable, but adjustments should be made.
- The exterior view is asymmetrical; the angle of the staggered roof doesn’t quite work.
- The window at the top of the shed roof looks like a solitary narrow slit; I would make it larger or plan for multiple windows there.
- On the upper floor, a large part of the square meters is used for a gallery that hardly anyone uses, while the bathroom is less than 10m² (108ft²), which is very small and almost like social housing standards.
- On the ground floor, I find the living room too small.
Overall, it is basically usable, but adjustments should be made.
heltino schrieb:
At the same time, the bathroom is not even 10 square meters (108 square feet) and therefore close to social housing standards.Statements like this are completely wrong and unnecessary! Why have a huge bathroom? You hardly spend time there, and it needs much more heating than other rooms. The size of a bathroom is totally a matter of personal taste, but calling small bathrooms social housing is simply ridiculous.
Wastl schrieb:
Why have a huge bathroom?I agree with that. In our rented apartment, we currently have a very large bathroom. For our new house, I wanted a bathroom no larger than 10 sqm (107.6 sq ft). I don’t need a ballroom or a "wellness oasis" because I can’t afford to waste space.
In the bathroom, I need space for a large bathtub, a big shower, a sink, and a toilet. Besides that, there should only be enough room to move around. That’s it.
On the plans, our 11sqm (118 sq ft) bathroom looked tiny. Especially since it also has a knee wall 1m (3 ft) high. Now, when I’m inside, I wonder why we made it so big 😀 A 90x90cm (36x36 inch) shower, a standard bathtub, toilet, and two washbasins... and still enough space to dance the waltz 🙂
Similar topics