ᐅ Single-family house floor plan, 1 full story, utilities and natural lighting
Created on: 22 Jul 2024 08:21
K
klabauter8614
Hello, I would like to gather feedback on the floor plan in order to finalize the design. We don’t have sections or elevations yet, but all other drawings are attached (house shown schematically on the site plan). Thanks.
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 473m² (5,089 ft²)
Slope: no
Site coverage ratio: 0.4
Floor area ratio
Building envelope, building line and boundary
Edge development
Number of parking spaces: maximum 2 without garage
Number of floors: 1 full floor
Roof type: gable roof
Architectural style
Orientation: Roof facing NNE - SSW
Maximum heights / limits: eave height 4.2m (13.8 ft), ridge height 9.5m (31.2 ft)
Further requirements: only renewable energy sources, infiltration trench for stormwater
Client Requirements
Style, roof type, building type
Basement, floors: no basement (groundwater level at 1m (3.3 ft) depth), 1 full floor
Number of occupants, ages: 4, aged 40-40-7-2 years
Space needs on ground floor and upper floor: Guesst room on the ground floor, office upstairs
Office use: family use or home office? Home office
Number of guest stays per year: 2 nights per week by one parent (also for coming years), parents-in-law stay several weeks annually
Open or closed layout
Traditional or modern construction
Open kitchen, kitchen island: semi-open (sliding door), kitchen island
Number of fixed dining seats: 6 fixed, expandable
Fireplace: no
Music/speaker wall: no
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: garage
Utility garden, greenhouse: herb garden
Additional wishes/special points/daily routine, including reasons for preferences or exclusions
House Design
Planner: synergy between architect and client, now 4th draft
What do you particularly like? Why? Guest room and WC + shower, similar existing layout already working (although a bed is drawn, it is actually a sofa bed), office on the north side, guest room size more than sufficient, wardrobe by the entrance, living room bright, washing machine + dryer upstairs.
What don’t you like? Why?
- Utility room is half unusable due to wardrobe protrusion (which is actually sensible) so it is too small. Attic storage needs to be moved from the garage into the thermal envelope inside the utility room, indoor unit could stay there. The mechanical ventilation system would also need to be installed in the utility room. Possible solution: enlarge kitchen to the rear and expand utility room accordingly. This would make the house larger though. No other solutions discussed yet.
- Stairs are too steep; architect now proposes a rise/run of 17.2cm/26cm (6.8"/10.2"), which may be borderline regarding comfortable step depth.
- Daylight in children’s rooms might be low due to west-facing windows and roughly 12.5% window-to-floor area ratio; simulation might be needed. Skylights wouldn’t significantly improve this; only a dormer and smaller gable windows would.
- As drawn, the kitchen island layout is not suitable for me; passage from utility room too narrow, should be moved to the opposite side, with sink and window to the left.
- Air conditioning would still be needed in the bedroom and children’s rooms, but with the current window and furniture arrangement this looks impractical.
- Shower upstairs located under sloped ceiling, not necessary but a minor point.
- Skylight in guest WC is not at head height, should be slightly higher, also a minor detail.
- Bathroom door upstairs should open outwards.
- Storage under the stairs is still missing.
- Partition wall in garage is unnecessary.
Cost estimate from architect/planner: unknown
Personal price limit for house including fixtures: 650,000
Preferred heating technology: air-source heat pump
If you must give up something, which features or extensions
- Can you give up: walk-in closet
- Cannot give up: office, guest room
Why is the design like it is now?
Own design developed based on space requirements plus architect’s counter proposal
What do you consider especially good or problematic?
Main issues to resolve are utility room + technical space and daylight.
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 473m² (5,089 ft²)
Slope: no
Site coverage ratio: 0.4
Floor area ratio
Building envelope, building line and boundary
Edge development
Number of parking spaces: maximum 2 without garage
Number of floors: 1 full floor
Roof type: gable roof
Architectural style
Orientation: Roof facing NNE - SSW
Maximum heights / limits: eave height 4.2m (13.8 ft), ridge height 9.5m (31.2 ft)
Further requirements: only renewable energy sources, infiltration trench for stormwater
Client Requirements
Style, roof type, building type
Basement, floors: no basement (groundwater level at 1m (3.3 ft) depth), 1 full floor
Number of occupants, ages: 4, aged 40-40-7-2 years
Space needs on ground floor and upper floor: Guesst room on the ground floor, office upstairs
Office use: family use or home office? Home office
Number of guest stays per year: 2 nights per week by one parent (also for coming years), parents-in-law stay several weeks annually
Open or closed layout
Traditional or modern construction
Open kitchen, kitchen island: semi-open (sliding door), kitchen island
Number of fixed dining seats: 6 fixed, expandable
Fireplace: no
Music/speaker wall: no
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: garage
Utility garden, greenhouse: herb garden
Additional wishes/special points/daily routine, including reasons for preferences or exclusions
House Design
Planner: synergy between architect and client, now 4th draft
What do you particularly like? Why? Guest room and WC + shower, similar existing layout already working (although a bed is drawn, it is actually a sofa bed), office on the north side, guest room size more than sufficient, wardrobe by the entrance, living room bright, washing machine + dryer upstairs.
What don’t you like? Why?
- Utility room is half unusable due to wardrobe protrusion (which is actually sensible) so it is too small. Attic storage needs to be moved from the garage into the thermal envelope inside the utility room, indoor unit could stay there. The mechanical ventilation system would also need to be installed in the utility room. Possible solution: enlarge kitchen to the rear and expand utility room accordingly. This would make the house larger though. No other solutions discussed yet.
- Stairs are too steep; architect now proposes a rise/run of 17.2cm/26cm (6.8"/10.2"), which may be borderline regarding comfortable step depth.
- Daylight in children’s rooms might be low due to west-facing windows and roughly 12.5% window-to-floor area ratio; simulation might be needed. Skylights wouldn’t significantly improve this; only a dormer and smaller gable windows would.
- As drawn, the kitchen island layout is not suitable for me; passage from utility room too narrow, should be moved to the opposite side, with sink and window to the left.
- Air conditioning would still be needed in the bedroom and children’s rooms, but with the current window and furniture arrangement this looks impractical.
- Shower upstairs located under sloped ceiling, not necessary but a minor point.
- Skylight in guest WC is not at head height, should be slightly higher, also a minor detail.
- Bathroom door upstairs should open outwards.
- Storage under the stairs is still missing.
- Partition wall in garage is unnecessary.
Cost estimate from architect/planner: unknown
Personal price limit for house including fixtures: 650,000
Preferred heating technology: air-source heat pump
If you must give up something, which features or extensions
- Can you give up: walk-in closet
- Cannot give up: office, guest room
Why is the design like it is now?
Own design developed based on space requirements plus architect’s counter proposal
What do you consider especially good or problematic?
Main issues to resolve are utility room + technical space and daylight.
klabauter8614 schrieb:
Maybe it’s the “it’s Friday 5:30 PM and I want to go home” effect. I am (and was yesterday) at home, but I had several days off, and then an email came in as well. But pulling a plan pipe only halfway because of that won’t happen again (something belonged here).
klabauter8614 schrieb:
But before we mess up the floor plan again and someone suggests moving the stairs: We could adjust the door positions, but no moving stairs or walls, right? You can only break what is whole. And Katja has already said that the “license condition” for her design (this version was only intended in case the staircase was to extend up to the attic) is no longer met.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
K
klabauter861431 Aug 2024 22:51ypg schrieb:
Because it’s not centered. That will look strange from the outside. Show the elevation view.
Balancing means equalizing. Left and right, so it looks proportionate. I still don’t understand the third window—do you mean another window next to the door? What does that have to do with the porch roof?
Here is the front elevation.
K a t j a schrieb:
Yes, although it no longer meets the new requirements. Somehow you are always a bit behind in your thinking. If the staircase to the attic space is removed, you should adjust the stair position accordingly. But I’m repeating myself. You have mentioned that several times, and I wonder if someone just copied it without considering the relative shift of the walls in relation to the front door, or if there is still some reasoning behind it. Looking at the entrance like this, I tend to think it’s the first option. The question remains, in my opinion: is this staircase position the best for this floor plan? This needs to be discussed alongside the technical aspects. I just hope they don’t simply replace the staircase and leave everything else as is, which would cause issues again (bringing us back to #1).
K
klabauter861431 Aug 2024 22:54Another question: My partner wanted to know what the effects would be if both clear ceiling heights were adjusted to 2.59m (8 feet 6 inches) and whether this is even possible. The planner wanted to see what could be done, but I haven’t received any further information on that yet.
klabauter8614 schrieb:
My partner wanted to know what the impact would be if both clear heights were adjusted to 2.59 m (8 ft 6 in) and whether that is even possible? It won’t be beneficial in any way, as you won’t notice the difference. The main purlins would move inward by about 10 cm (4 inches) as well, and the entire roof truss geometry would need to be recalibrated.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
K
klabauter861431 Aug 2024 23:59It could be that the entrance ended up like this because the 4.01m (13.2 feet) dimension in the living room area was maintained (see #1). As a result, the entrance area naturally shifts closer to the utility room, and if the utility room is also made quite wide, then there is obviously no space left for a proper entrance.
H
hanghaus20232 Sep 2024 12:20I understand the proposal from @ypg as follows.
To improve the passage, reduce the number of steps by one with a rise of 18.3 cm (7.2 inches). Then adjust the wardrobe area slightly.
To improve the passage, reduce the number of steps by one with a rise of 18.3 cm (7.2 inches). Then adjust the wardrobe area slightly.
Similar topics