ᐅ Ridge beam too long? Looking for options without a central support column in the room

Hello dear homebuilding forum,

we are currently struggling with our floor plan design.
The approved plans were already signed off when we received feedback from the technical review (developer).
The room length of the bedroom/home office, or rather the length of the main beam running through it, is too long (about 660cm (260 inches), but it is only allowed to be 600cm (236 inches)).

We have tried to work out options with our architect, but none of them are really ideal.

Attached is the first plan, where we intended to use the dressing room with a window as a home office, without a wall, possibly visually separated by a wardrobe.

Since the main beam is now apparently too long, a post would have to be added (post option), which we do not want at all.
With this option, there is still the possibility to “hide” the post behind an interior wall. However, if we run the wall from bottom to top, the light from the office window would be mostly blocked. Running the wall from top to bottom would allow the light through, but then you would be looking from the bed onto the desk, which is also not ideal.
The last option (move wall) we thought of is related to the main beam length problem: why not simply move the wall of the left child’s room to the right so that the total length of the main beam is exactly 600cm (236 inches)? The only disadvantage here is that the children’s rooms become asymmetrical and the desk moves further into the room. As a result, we may no longer be able to place the wardrobe as a visual divider.

Do you have any ideas on how we could improve our design? Ideally, so that there is no visible post standing in the middle of the room? 😀

Many thanks in advance 🙂

hausamfeld schrieb:

that way, you probably always end up looking from the bed onto the desk, which isn’t very appealing either.

You’re bothered by a support column and want to hide it with a wall, but then you’re still bothered by the view of the desk? You would have seen the column in all its glory in the initial design anyway.

If I were in your position, I would have the support column installed without a wall. Later on, you can either leave the column as is or separate the rooms with cabinets. That way, you’ll have more flexibility.

The support must also rest on something that can transfer the load. What does the architect suggest?

PhiIipp schrieb:

You’re bothered by a support column, want to hide it with a wall, and then you’re still bothered by the view of the desk?
You would have seen it in all its glory in the very first design anyway.

If I were you, I would have the support column installed without a wall. Later, you can either leave it as a support or use cabinets to divide the rooms. That way, you’re more flexible.

Hi Philipp, in the first plan, we still had a cabinet planned as a room divider (you might see it in picture 1).
Flexible is right—that would definitely be an option.

Myrna_Loy schrieb:

But the support column has to rest on something that can carry the load. What does the architect suggest?

Hi Myrna_Loy, hmm, that’s a good point. On the ground floor, there’s nothing directly below this support column (it’s roughly in the middle of the kitchen, but with no walls).
The architect is a bit unsure here and passes every question directly to structural engineering, which means resolving any options always takes a long time 🙁
I also already asked if a beam might be an option, but apparently that’s not feasible, or the clearance would be under 180cm (about 6 feet), which obviously wouldn’t work either 🙂

hausamfeld schrieb:

Hi Philipp, in the first plan we had a cabinet planned as a room divider (you might see it in picture 1)

Ah, okay. I couldn’t quite place that. I thought it was already the revised version.

Now I understand your frustration with the support column even less. It’s really not an issue. Just put the cabinet in front of it and that’s it. I assume the cabinet isn’t a ready-made one anyway, so you could even cover the column if you want.

Why shouldn't it be possible to make the intermediate purlin longer? In principle, they can be much longer. Perhaps the cross-section would need to be larger then.