ᐅ Floor Plan Design for New Single-Family Home – 610 sqm Plot – Feedback Welcome

house4family schrieb:

Well, I find this independence of children, especially regarding taking responsibility for cleaning, quite desirable. I would like to keep that somewhat separate, after all, puberty comes at some point, when the house will also be temporarily more occupied ;-)

My children help with all household chores. Admittedly, not entirely voluntarily, but it is possible for children to clean bathrooms that everyone uses.
To me, these so-called must-haves seem rather strange. Parents’ wing, open space, kids’ bathroom, back kitchen… These are all space-consuming features, and a house has to be able to afford them. In your case, there is an imbalance of abundant space above the dining table – without a genuine gallery that brings openness to the upper floor – while the rest feels cramped, with odd small windows here and there.

Myrna_Loy schrieb:

My children help out with all household chores. Admittedly, not entirely voluntarily, but it is doable for children to clean bathrooms that are used by everyone.
I find these so-called must-haves rather odd. Parent suite, open void, kids’ bathroom, scullery… These all take up a lot of space, and a house needs to allow for that. In your case, there is a disproportionate excess of space above the dining area – without a proper gallery that brings that openness upstairs – while the rest feels cramped with strange small windows here and there.

The open void not only provides natural light and a sense of space on the ground floor but also allows for a knee wall height of 1.60m (5 ft 3 in) in a single-story design. This adds more than a meter (over 3 ft) of extra height to all rooms on the upper floor compared to a standard upper floor.
Roof slopes are challenging enough by themselves; I’m very glad to have more headroom this way.
In your opinion, how could we better integrate the living room with the upper floor? (The open gallery is nice but not very practical)

I’ve calculated this now—not because I have a lot of free time, but because the ground floor layout covers many of the things we want, and I’ve rarely seen anything like it elsewhere. After recreating it in my planning software, I also have a better idea of why I haven’t seen it before: the ground floor alone is almost 120m² (1,292 sq ft) of living space. Given current construction costs, that’s quite significant. If money weren’t an issue, I’d build something similar, but I think it would be a bit too large for us.

kati1337 schrieb:

The ground floor alone is almost 120m² (1,292 sq ft) of living space.

What kind of slide rule are you using? 🙄 Just glanced quickly, about 106.

kati1337 schrieb:

I’ve done the calculations—not because I’m bored, but because the ground floor layout covers many of our wishes, and I rarely see something like this elsewhere.
After sketching it out in my planning tool, I have a rough idea why I haven’t seen anything like this before:
The ground floor alone has almost 120m² (1,292 sq ft) of living space.
Given current construction costs, that’s quite significant. If money wasn’t an issue, I’d build something similar, but I think it would be a bit too big for us.

Hello Kati,
that’s an important point ... we also have great respect for our initial offer. Then we’ll see whether we need to go back to the drawing board to cut about one-third or if the proposal works as it is.

Our design has the following areas:
(without the garage and bike shed)
Ground floor: gross floor area (GFA): 145m² (1,560 sq ft), net floor area (NFA): 109.5m² (1,179 sq ft), living space: 103m² (1,109 sq ft)
Upper floor: net floor area: 110.4m² (1,188 sq ft), living space: 89m² (958 sq ft)

From your perspective, are there areas that seem too large?
We are building (unfortunately) without a basement, so a certain amount of storage space has to be provided on the upper floors. Our list of requirements resulted in these floor plan dimensions. Apart from the inflated construction costs, there are many existing examples nearby with similar sizes. Unfortunately, we are simply 5 to 10 years late with our build.

driver55 schrieb:

What kind of slide rule are you using? 🙄 Just skimmed through, about 106.

I’ve summed it up again.

driver55 schrieb:

What kind of slide rule do you have? 🙄 Just skimmed through, about 106.

I actually traced it out and my walls are thinner, so that probably explains the discrepancy in the measurements. But still close to 110, which is quite ambitious for just the ground floor.

house4family schrieb:

Are there any areas that you think are too large?

At first glance, I really like it as it is. We might move the garage to the other side so it’s next to the utility room (for the electric vehicle charger from the main distribution). Also, make the restroom smaller in favor of a dedicated cloakroom (which I find inconvenient in the hallway in our current home).
That makes the hallway quite long with 16m² (170 sq ft) that isn’t very usable. On the other hand, it’s hard to arrange differently with this layout. I can’t think of an alternative either.
The living/dining area is nearly 50m² (540 sq ft), which is huge, but that’s exactly what I like about the design. Space for a round table (my dream) with eight seats, extendable even, room for a Christmas tree (which I currently miss), space for a TV unit plus a separate wall cabinet, and still bright and airy. Also, the large pantry – I love ours even though it’s way too small.
If you want all of that, it quickly becomes quite spacious. I don’t know how you could make it smaller.