ᐅ Floor Plan Design for a Single-Family Home of Approximately 250 sqm with a Separate Granny Flat
Created on: 26 Jan 2025 21:52
C
CornforthWhite
I already feel a bit anxious writing this, anticipating the inevitable criticism of our design, but I’m posting it anyway. We struggled somewhat with the software, so much of the presentation is still quite provisional. Our main goal is to find out whether what we’ve basically planned could work. We’re primarily looking for feedback on functional planning errors. Style critique is sure to come since our design is unlikely to suit most people’s taste here—but that interests us less (we like what we like, and that probably won’t change). Although tastes vary, I’ve learned a lot from other threads recently and hope that “the usual suspects” might also take a look at our design. Thanks in advance!
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 960 m² (10,333 sq ft)
Slope: no
Floor area ratio: 0.2, maximum buildable footprint however <175 m² (1,883 sq ft)
BUT: the 1977 Building Use Ordinance applies
Floor space index: -
Building envelope, building line and boundary: 5 m (16 ft) from the road on the south and west, 3 m (10 ft) from neighbors on the north and east
Edge development: no
Number of parking spaces: 1.5 per dwelling unit
Number of storeys: 1 + attic
Roof style: no fixed style, but roof pitch regulation with 2 options
Option 1: 22–26 degrees
Option 2: 33–44 degrees
Architectural style: no specification
Orientation: flexible
Maximum heights / limits: in red the official restrictions of the development plan, in green the generously granted exceptions we are aware of (several times approved). The neighbors recently submitted a building application aiming for slightly higher eaves and knee wall heights—this will serve as a reference for us.
For roof option 1 (22–26 degrees pitch): ridge height max. 8 m (26 ft) (or 8.15 m / 27 ft), eaves height max. 4.0 m (13 ft) (or 5.20–5.30 m / 17–17.5 ft), knee wall max. 115 cm (45 in) (or 2.20–2.30 m / 7–7.5 ft)
For roof option 2 (33–44 degrees pitch): ridge height max. 10.5 m (34 ft), eaves height max. 3.5 m (11.5 ft), knee wall max. 40 cm (16 in) (exceptions probably possible but no figures known)
Definition of eaves height: Top of rough ground floor slab to intersection of exterior wall with the bottom edge of the rafters
Definition of knee wall: Top of rough attic floor slab to intersection of exterior wall with the bottom edge of the rafters
Client Requirements
Architectural style, roof shape, building type: a new build that does not look like a typical new build
Basement, floors: no basement (high groundwater level, no living space planned underground), two full stories (which are effectively possible due to generous exceptions from the development plan)
Number of people, age: my mother (70+), my husband and I (late 30s), 2 cats, 1 dog, 1 child planned
Space requirements on ground and upper floors: On the ground floor a self-contained apartment for my mother and kitchen / living / dining / utility for us;
Office: 2 offices (both approx. 50% and 80% remote work)
Guest stays per year: about 2–3 weeks
Open or closed layout: open on the ground floor
Conservative or modern building style: conservative
Open kitchen, kitchen island: yes to both
Number of dining seats: 6–8
Fireplace: yes (gas fireplace)
Music/sound system wall: no
Balcony, roof terrace: balcony would be nice
Garage, carport: spacious double garage
Utility garden, greenhouse: rather no
Other wishes / special features / daily routine, including reasons why some things are desired or not:
House Design
Who designed it: DIY
What do you like most and why?
- Style inspired by classic American Colonial architecture
- Living area centered around the fireplace
- Porch with insect protection, fireplace & privacy
- Kitchen island with plenty of workspace
- Small “secondary kitchen” to temporarily hide dirty dishes / cooking mess
What do you not like? Why?
I wouldn’t exactly say “dislike,” but we have doubts about the following points:
Personal price limit for the house, including fittings: we’re budgeting €3,000 per m² plus additional costs and landscaping, but have significant equity and thus some flexibility upwards; also plan a lot of personal work.
Preferred heating technology: heat pump with geothermal probe
If you have to give up something, which features/finishes
- Could be sacrificed: balcony
- Cannot be sacrificed: no compromises on the self-contained apartment
Why is the design like it is now?
We originally wanted to buy a house with old-style charm but found nothing suitable. Although we like modern, minimalist architecture, it’s not for us personally.
I’ll help a bit with the images.
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 960 m² (10,333 sq ft)
Slope: no
Floor area ratio: 0.2, maximum buildable footprint however <175 m² (1,883 sq ft)
BUT: the 1977 Building Use Ordinance applies
- § 19 IV: Ancillary structures according to § 14 are not counted towards the allowable footprint. The same applies to balconies, loggias, terraces, and structural elements as far as they are permitted within setback areas or distance zones under regional law (here: Bavaria) (…).
- § 21a III: Covered parking spaces and garages are not to be counted towards the allowable footprint as long as they are less than 0.1 of the plot area.
Floor space index: -
Building envelope, building line and boundary: 5 m (16 ft) from the road on the south and west, 3 m (10 ft) from neighbors on the north and east
Edge development: no
Number of parking spaces: 1.5 per dwelling unit
Number of storeys: 1 + attic
Roof style: no fixed style, but roof pitch regulation with 2 options
Option 1: 22–26 degrees
Option 2: 33–44 degrees
Architectural style: no specification
Orientation: flexible
Maximum heights / limits: in red the official restrictions of the development plan, in green the generously granted exceptions we are aware of (several times approved). The neighbors recently submitted a building application aiming for slightly higher eaves and knee wall heights—this will serve as a reference for us.
For roof option 1 (22–26 degrees pitch): ridge height max. 8 m (26 ft) (or 8.15 m / 27 ft), eaves height max. 4.0 m (13 ft) (or 5.20–5.30 m / 17–17.5 ft), knee wall max. 115 cm (45 in) (or 2.20–2.30 m / 7–7.5 ft)
For roof option 2 (33–44 degrees pitch): ridge height max. 10.5 m (34 ft), eaves height max. 3.5 m (11.5 ft), knee wall max. 40 cm (16 in) (exceptions probably possible but no figures known)
Definition of eaves height: Top of rough ground floor slab to intersection of exterior wall with the bottom edge of the rafters
Definition of knee wall: Top of rough attic floor slab to intersection of exterior wall with the bottom edge of the rafters
Client Requirements
Architectural style, roof shape, building type: a new build that does not look like a typical new build
Basement, floors: no basement (high groundwater level, no living space planned underground), two full stories (which are effectively possible due to generous exceptions from the development plan)
Number of people, age: my mother (70+), my husband and I (late 30s), 2 cats, 1 dog, 1 child planned
Space requirements on ground and upper floors: On the ground floor a self-contained apartment for my mother and kitchen / living / dining / utility for us;
Office: 2 offices (both approx. 50% and 80% remote work)
Guest stays per year: about 2–3 weeks
Open or closed layout: open on the ground floor
Conservative or modern building style: conservative
Open kitchen, kitchen island: yes to both
Number of dining seats: 6–8
Fireplace: yes (gas fireplace)
Music/sound system wall: no
Balcony, roof terrace: balcony would be nice
Garage, carport: spacious double garage
Utility garden, greenhouse: rather no
Other wishes / special features / daily routine, including reasons why some things are desired or not:
- Covered terrace / loggia / outdoor seating with reliable but as discreet as possible insect protection (lakeside location, regular mosquito issue) & fireplace (probably gas as well)
- A rather unpopular opinion here, but we explicitly do not want roller shutters or venetian blinds. We currently have them despite many south-facing windows and never use them (feels like a vault). Instead, we plan air conditioning (powered by photovoltaics) and larger trees.
- Gas stove (I just can’t get comfortable with induction)
- Washing machine & dryer on the upper floor
- In one office, a small niche for an exercise bike (turbo trainer)
House Design
Who designed it: DIY
What do you like most and why?
- Style inspired by classic American Colonial architecture
- Living area centered around the fireplace
- Porch with insect protection, fireplace & privacy
- Kitchen island with plenty of workspace
- Small “secondary kitchen” to temporarily hide dirty dishes / cooking mess
What do you not like? Why?
I wouldn’t exactly say “dislike,” but we have doubts about the following points:
- Passage between garage and house might be too narrow?
- Entrance and staircase possibly not spacious enough?
- Staircase: can’t properly design it in the software, but according to a stair calculation tool it should work. Is the space requirement adequate? Are the asymmetrical runs a problem?
- Bedroom in the self-contained apartment is borderline small
- Bathrooms: enough space?
- Utility/technical room: large enough?
- Could a mechanical ventilation system with heat recovery possibly be installed in the crawl space attic?
Personal price limit for the house, including fittings: we’re budgeting €3,000 per m² plus additional costs and landscaping, but have significant equity and thus some flexibility upwards; also plan a lot of personal work.
Preferred heating technology: heat pump with geothermal probe
If you have to give up something, which features/finishes
- Could be sacrificed: balcony
- Cannot be sacrificed: no compromises on the self-contained apartment
Why is the design like it is now?
We originally wanted to buy a house with old-style charm but found nothing suitable. Although we like modern, minimalist architecture, it’s not for us personally.
I’ll help a bit with the images.
S
Schorsch_baut27 Jan 2025 18:54I would at least avoid wasting time on construction, as pregnancy and babies do not go well together with self-managed building sites. We seriously underestimated this back then because we thought the baby stuff would be a breeze with the second child, without any surprises. That was a really tough year.
C
CornforthWhite27 Jan 2025 19:12ypg schrieb:
Back to the beginning:
To your surprise, there hasn’t been any criticism, right?It might still come, who knows.
ypg schrieb:
You’ve received a lot of input on this.
What I noticed is that your very specific questions (entryway, stairs, bedroom in the granny flat, bathrooms, etc.) were addressed, but you dismiss them. Why did you ask those questions?I responded to every single post and said in many cases that we would review these points again. That takes time. It will take a few days to make some changes. I might even share the revised versions here for comparison, but just because we haven’t re-planned everything in less than 24 hours doesn’t mean I should be labeled as resistant to advice. For some points of criticism, I also asked follow-up questions but haven’t received answers yet (which is fine, people have other things to do or lost interest in the thread... all good). For example, you said both bathrooms were too small. I asked where exactly you saw the issues, but got no further response. That makes it difficult to draw meaningful conclusions.
ypg schrieb:
No one here mentioned accessibility specifically, but rather that, for example, a rollator needs space and older people require some maneuvering room. What you do with that is your choice.
You mentioned several times that you had the same setup. But that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t improve things if you can.Because multiple comments pointed out that the granny flat is too small, we are currently looking at how to create more space and improve the layout. See, for example, my post at 5:23 PM.
On the other hand, I think it’s fair to say, “We had it like that too (and many others do), and it worked well for us.” For example, the downstairs toilet that you consider too small. As I said, of course, more space would be better, but that would mean compromises elsewhere, making it a matter of personal priorities.
ypg schrieb:
It’s not as if no one here knows what self-performed work is. Honestly, no matter how ambitious or willing your husband is to do “some” work, as well as you, many here also know that there’s a big difference between renovating a manageable apartment and doing all the interior work on a 250sqm (2690 sq ft) house with 3-meter (9 ft 10 in) ceilings. Many have had to forfeit their annual leave just to cover the essentials in terms of “painting done by the builder.” And for most, a wellness day wasn’t enough recovery afterwards, as they typically do this as a hobby, not a full-time job.
I don’t want to sound presumptuous (just as I don’t feel offended when people assume I went for a turnkey house – I know how much I sweated just to get the walls ready to live in, as well as some of the interior finishes), but it feels like you’re somehow living in an American bubble and just let us talk. Maybe some things will be reviewed again.
However, with – in my opinion – some small changes, it can become a stylish, very livable, and distinctive house... once there’s a large refrigerator in the main kitchen.
The minor disputed issues might cause some discomfort in everyday living or when furnishing. But you can live with that. We all know: the first house is for the enemy, the second for the friend, and so on.Just as a side note: the ceiling height is unfortunately only 2.70m (8 ft 10 in), although I would personally prefer 3m (9 ft 10 in). I find the huge American-style refrigerators quite unattractive, and quite a few Americans now ironically feel the same – apparently, the European-style built-in refrigerators are very trendy at the moment. Otherwise, I don’t understand the connection between desired self-performed work (not this topic again…) and being in an American bubble, or why anyone would assume I live in one at all. The style can definitely be realized easily in Europe as well; several Swedish house suppliers explicitly offer it for the German market. Stylistically, traditional American Colonials are based on European models anyway (mainly English and Dutch), so I don’t find these houses that “foreign” at all.
C
CornforthWhite27 Jan 2025 19:13Schorsch_baut schrieb:
I would at least avoid losing time on construction, as pregnant women and babies don’t mix well with DIY building sites. We seriously underestimated this back then because we thought that with a second child, the baby stuff would be straightforward without surprises. It turned out to be a really tough year. Yes, if the timing overlaps, there will certainly be less DIY work and more paid help needed, no question.
I don’t want to discourage you from doing some work yourself – I have enough experience to look at it realistically.
Have you ever heard of the ergonomic triangle in the kitchen? I’m starting to lose track of what exactly you want to do in each kitchen.
Upper floor: the route from the children’s room to the bathroom.
The odd corner in the children’s room because of the bicycle in the office.
The master bathroom lacks lighting, and the shower is located very close to the toilet – it might cause wet feet.
Have you ever heard of the ergonomic triangle in the kitchen? I’m starting to lose track of what exactly you want to do in each kitchen.
Upper floor: the route from the children’s room to the bathroom.
The odd corner in the children’s room because of the bicycle in the office.
The master bathroom lacks lighting, and the shower is located very close to the toilet – it might cause wet feet.
H
hanghaus202327 Jan 2025 20:09wiltshire schrieb:
I don’t have any issues with the attachments either – not even in the first post.I don’t have any issues either anymore. There are now 8 attachments instead of 4.
Presumably, someone fixed it, so my post disappeared along with it.
Hi, I’d like to add my two cents.
First of all, hats off to the planning. The overall concept looks pretty good, as long as the municipality actually approves the knee wall (kniestock).
Here’s what would really bother me:
I’m also missing measurements and preferably a 2D site plan.
And finally, the question: why don’t you have this designed by a professional? Did you just want to experiment, or are you worried the architect wouldn’t put in enough effort?
First of all, hats off to the planning. The overall concept looks pretty good, as long as the municipality actually approves the knee wall (kniestock).
Here’s what would really bother me:
- The chimney including the flue is in the wrong place. On one hand, it blocks the view and the access to the terrace – very inconvenient. On the other hand, this pipe runs up the exterior wall of the house. That doesn’t look good. Could it be moved to the right side wall of the living room? Unfortunately, it’s not clear if or how close the walls are to each other.
- The dining room feels quite tight. But it seems like you’re not big on having guests anyway.
- My gut feeling is that the chill-out area and the dining room should be swapped – but I’m not entirely sure.
- This “bike closet” is just ridiculous. Why can’t that be combined with the office? That awkward extension would be gone immediately, leaving two nice, rectangular rooms.
- I would move the bedroom door right up to the dressing area. That would create a calmer hallway and your clothes wouldn’t be immediately visible.
- Why a sliding door in the small office?
- Regarding the granny flat – have you already discussed it with your mom? I think it’s okay but I’d probably have other priorities. Does she really need five dining seats? Which brings me to my next point:
- The driveway to the granny flat seems to cut right through your terrace. I see that as a major disadvantage and it might even make me rethink the whole plan. And what if you have five guests – well, good luck with that!
I’m also missing measurements and preferably a 2D site plan.
And finally, the question: why don’t you have this designed by a professional? Did you just want to experiment, or are you worried the architect wouldn’t put in enough effort?
Similar topics