ᐅ Floor Plan Design for a 180 m² Single-Family Home with South-Facing Driveway – Challenging Layouts
Created on: 16 Feb 2024 23:10
C
Cubus3f
Development Plan/Restrictions
Plot size: 450m2 (4,844 sq ft)
Slope: No
Floor Area Ratio (FAR): 0.4
Gross Floor Area Ratio (GFAR): 0.8
Building envelope, building line, and boundary: Plot measures 18.36 x 24.49 meters (60.2 x 80.4 feet); building envelopes are set back 3 meters (10 feet) to the north, east, and west, and 5 meters (16.4 feet) to the south (street side)
Edge development: Yes
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of stories: 2
Roof type: Flat roof
Style: modern, open
Orientation: south/west
Maximum heights/limits:
Additional regulations: Moderately busy street to the south; a multi-family building is located to the north
Client Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: modern, open, flat roof
Basement, stories: No basement, 2 full stories
Number of occupants, ages: 2 middle-aged adults, 2 children (6 and 1 year old)
Space requirements ground floor, upper floor: Ground floor 100m² (1,076 sq ft), upper floor 80m² (861 sq ft)
Office: family use or home office? Home office
Guests per year: 2 persons, 3 times per year
Open or closed architecture: open
Conservative or modern construction: modern
Open kitchen, kitchen island
Number of dining seats: 8
Fireplace: no
Music/stereo wall: no
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: both yes
Vegetable garden, greenhouse: no
Additional wishes/particulars/daily routine, including reasons for preferences:
Living and dining areas as much as possible facing south
Kitchen with freestanding island and partly open pantry around the corner
House Design
Designed by:
- Planner from a construction company
- Architect
What do you particularly like? Why? Workshop at the back, bicycle stand, size of children’s rooms, master bedroom area on the north side, staircase option 1
What do you dislike? Why? Very small garden, especially between the terrace and neighboring house
Option 1:
Ground floor:
Upper floor:
Option 2:
Ground floor:
Upper floor:
Price estimate according to architect/planner: 3,200 €/m2
Personal price limit for house including fixtures: 700,000 €
Preferred heating system: heat pump
If you had to give up some features/finishes, which ones?
- Can give up: open staircase
- Cannot give up: pantry, kitchen with island, utility room on upper floor, children’s bathroom, large dressing room
Why is the design like it is now? For example:
Standard design from the planner? Architect developed options 1 & 2 after consultation
Which of your wishes were implemented by the architect?
A mix of many examples from various magazines...
What do you think are the particular strengths or weaknesses of the design?
Do you have suggestions on how we should plan the living/dining/kitchen area to create an L-shaped layout? There should be space for a kitchen island (2.35m x 1.1m) (7.7 x 3.6 feet). The staircase should be placed centrally in the house to improve the layout of the upper floor rooms.
Any other improvement suggestions?
Many thanks
Cubus3f
Plot size: 450m2 (4,844 sq ft)
Slope: No
Floor Area Ratio (FAR): 0.4
Gross Floor Area Ratio (GFAR): 0.8
Building envelope, building line, and boundary: Plot measures 18.36 x 24.49 meters (60.2 x 80.4 feet); building envelopes are set back 3 meters (10 feet) to the north, east, and west, and 5 meters (16.4 feet) to the south (street side)
Edge development: Yes
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of stories: 2
Roof type: Flat roof
Style: modern, open
Orientation: south/west
Maximum heights/limits:
Additional regulations: Moderately busy street to the south; a multi-family building is located to the north
Client Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: modern, open, flat roof
Basement, stories: No basement, 2 full stories
Number of occupants, ages: 2 middle-aged adults, 2 children (6 and 1 year old)
Space requirements ground floor, upper floor: Ground floor 100m² (1,076 sq ft), upper floor 80m² (861 sq ft)
Office: family use or home office? Home office
Guests per year: 2 persons, 3 times per year
Open or closed architecture: open
Conservative or modern construction: modern
Open kitchen, kitchen island
Number of dining seats: 8
Fireplace: no
Music/stereo wall: no
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: both yes
Vegetable garden, greenhouse: no
Additional wishes/particulars/daily routine, including reasons for preferences:
Living and dining areas as much as possible facing south
Kitchen with freestanding island and partly open pantry around the corner
House Design
Designed by:
- Planner from a construction company
- Architect
What do you particularly like? Why? Workshop at the back, bicycle stand, size of children’s rooms, master bedroom area on the north side, staircase option 1
What do you dislike? Why? Very small garden, especially between the terrace and neighboring house
Option 1:
Ground floor:
- Bad: Kitchen too small, freestanding kitchen island measuring 2.35m x 1.1m (7.7 x 3.6 feet) does not fit, entrance to living area too narrow
- Good: spacious hallway, open staircase with landing
Upper floor:
- Bad: Access to children’s bathroom through utility room, entrance to master bedroom through dressing room, makeup table in master bedroom instead of dressing room
- Good: spacious master bathroom, size of utility room and children’s bathroom
Option 2:
Ground floor:
- Bad: no staircase landing, small entrance/hallway, entrance to living area directly from the foyer
- Good: large kitchen
Upper floor:
- Bad: utility room too large, entrance to sleeping area awkward (one walks into a wall), makeup table in master bedroom, master bathroom too small
- Good: separate entrance to utility room
Price estimate according to architect/planner: 3,200 €/m2
Personal price limit for house including fixtures: 700,000 €
Preferred heating system: heat pump
If you had to give up some features/finishes, which ones?
- Can give up: open staircase
- Cannot give up: pantry, kitchen with island, utility room on upper floor, children’s bathroom, large dressing room
Why is the design like it is now? For example:
Standard design from the planner? Architect developed options 1 & 2 after consultation
Which of your wishes were implemented by the architect?
A mix of many examples from various magazines...
What do you think are the particular strengths or weaknesses of the design?
Do you have suggestions on how we should plan the living/dining/kitchen area to create an L-shaped layout? There should be space for a kitchen island (2.35m x 1.1m) (7.7 x 3.6 feet). The staircase should be placed centrally in the house to improve the layout of the upper floor rooms.
Any other improvement suggestions?
Many thanks
Cubus3f
What I also notice … the bike shed is not suitable for the assumed 5 bicycles.
EDIT:
And another thing I notice, since we are already criticizing the poorly planned storage space, there seems to be some kind of storage phobia here, with so many cabinets planned. Plus the large storage room in the basement.
Is the budget even enough now? It was originally 700,000 with the assumption of 3,200 per square meter (approximately 297 per square foot).
EDIT:
And another thing I notice, since we are already criticizing the poorly planned storage space, there seems to be some kind of storage phobia here, with so many cabinets planned. Plus the large storage room in the basement.
Is the budget even enough now? It was originally 700,000 with the assumption of 3,200 per square meter (approximately 297 per square foot).
ypg schrieb:
Phew, that’s quite a transformation...
I must admit: I’m not just not a fan, but actually against passages between cars. It’s not only about postal and package delivery people having to squeeze between vehicles, but also residents themselves when they don’t use a car.
A granny flat without a terrace... how old is your mother-in-law? Is she paying for the basement? Because then she gets a dark basement room without a terrace but has to accept a rather long walk around the house. Due to its location, almost no daylight reaches the granny flat through the window. What little light there is doesn’t even reach the middle of the room.
A granny flat in the basement level on the south side would be better located.
The idea of access on the west side basically takes your entire west garden away. You barely have a meter (about 3 feet) left to walk around the house.
You should think carefully about how you want to use, maintain, and access your outdoor areas. I don’t see this as practical for everyday use.
I also find the location of the utility room rather illogical: why accept long pipe runs when you could place the utility room at the front corner of the house? My spontaneous suggestion would be to place both the utility room and the granny flat at the front. Do you know what the planner was thinking, making the granny flat have to take such a long walk around the house? We’re also not fans of this passage through parked cars, but unfortunately, we haven’t found any other option (street on the south side, entrance on the east).
The granny flat on the south side doesn’t work because our garden is on the south. We wanted a larger, continuous garden space. This is only possible on the south side because we did not want a north-facing garden or a narrow strip on the west side.
Utility room: we will have a split-system heat pump, and we don’t want the outdoor unit on the south side.
The main access to the granny flat is through our ground floor. My mother-in-law will spend a lot of time with us.
11ant schrieb:
That must be one pretty awful mother-in-law to be parked as a basement dweller in a cellar accessible only through the light well. It seems the architect has a particular fondness for utility rooms – not exactly designing for comfortable living. I don’t have time right now to find the thread, but we once had a case here where the original poster had to share the planner of a multi-story apartment building because the developer was constructing, if I remember correctly, one or more apartment blocks plus a detached house and a duplex. Honestly, I don’t find anything particularly attractive about this.
I can only echo the question. What caused the long delay: did you have limited time, or did the planner take ages to produce this masterpiece?The long delay was due to the decision to include a granny flat. And the architect wasn’t the fastest.
kbt09 schrieb:
What I also noticed... the bike shed isn’t suitable for the assumed 5 bicycles.
EDIT:
And, since we’re already criticizing, if the storage space isn’t well thought out, it seems there is some kind of storage-phobia here, given how many cupboards are planned. Plus, there’s the large storage room in the basement.
Is the budget still sufficient? It was once 700,000 with the assumption of 3,200/sqm (297 sq ft).Thanks for the note about the shed. We already have that on the list for the next meeting.
The budget has increased from 700k to 1 million, including additional costs and landscaping.
And you can never have enough storage, right?
Cubus3f schrieb:
The mother-in-law will spend a lot of time at our place and with us.I would quickly get a walker and claim the room on the ground floor, the basement is available for whoever wants it, but not me as the mother-in-law.Cubus3f schrieb:
The granny flat can’t be on the south side because our garden is to the south. Cubus3f schrieb:
We wanted a larger, continuous garden area. Next to the carports?! You had it once on the west side with a narrow house. Now the house has grown, an extra floor has been added, a pantry, a utility room, a freezer room and a storage room in the basement, and grandma will be next to the storage room. If only the house had at least gotten smaller, so that you would still have some of the 450 sqm (4,843 sq ft). If one were spiteful, one would say that you don’t want to give grandma the entire length of the house because the windows wouldn’t meet the building code requirements. Hence the strange shape of the storage room.
But if this is what you want, as shown here, then so be it. I just don’t see a logical implementation. It can’t be justified that the poorly planned and rather inadequate granny flat is explained by the fact that the occupant spends a lot of time elsewhere and hardly any time at home. Then just give up the small office on the ground floor, which is at least accessible without barriers.
Your number of residents has now increased from 3 to 4, so you have to plan differently and fall back on plan B. But what I see here is only bigger, more, and only half-heartedly an apartment in the basement. You can’t really call it a garden-level basement. The current basement can only be described as a hole dug out so that the apartment gets one or two daylight windows and rooms where people can spend time. While an apartment does consist of living spaces, living spaces alone do not make a granny flat.
Cubus3f schrieb:
Technology: it will be a split unit heat pump Technology includes more than just heating: water supply and drainage, electricity, fiber optics or similar...
Cubus3f schrieb:
The mother-in-law will spend a lot of time with us. Sigh, see above. If I were the mother-in-law, I wouldn’t even feel comfortable inviting anyone home. I find the apartment embarrassing. No matter how old or young you are, it just doesn’t fit. The only nice thing is the size, which is well done.
At least make a pleasant terrace in the west area and keep the entrance via the stairs from the main apartment.
Similar topics