We are renovating a terraced house from the 1960s with split-level floors. Since we want to have direct access to the garden on one level, our architect recommended a single-story extension (entrance, cloakroom, kitchen, and dining room). From there, the first split level would be reached by 7 steps. This level would include the living room, toilet, and office. One exterior wall of the original house will be removed.
At first, I thought this would be really cool, like a gallery or split-level house. Now, I’m not sure if it might be inconvenient in everyday life. You enter the living room by going up 7 steps in the dining room. The wall will be removed to create an open layout.
I would really appreciate your opinions!
At first, I thought this would be really cool, like a gallery or split-level house. Now, I’m not sure if it might be inconvenient in everyday life. You enter the living room by going up 7 steps in the dining room. The wall will be removed to create an open layout.
I would really appreciate your opinions!
wpic schrieb:
I find the architect’s solution elegant and stylish – of course, the circulation areas (entrance/utility room/hallway) are fairly generous. But this might be due to the existing building’s structure. In my opinion, the staggered levels always organize somewhat larger floor plan relationships in an interesting way.
There will naturally be a visual connection between the kitchen/dining and living areas without a closed wall between them, right? More like an open gallery concept. This way, the fireplace can also be seen from the dining area. There is still a height difference of 3cm (1.2 inches) between the “gallery-living” and the hallway. The architect should level that out. The kitchen workspace might be a bit small. Thanks for the reply!
I consider the visual connection between the kitchen/dining and living areas very important, as I really want an open and coherent living space.
Regarding the kitchen – the island is planned at 2.40m (7 ft 10 in). We might possibly extend it along the window front, but then we would have to rethink the sliding door and wouldn’t be able to walk all around the island anymore. It’s worth considering.
dbertig schrieb:
The drawback is that we have limited space in the dining room for a cozy seating or lounging area for the children.They can, of course, go upstairs if they are not restricted downstairs and, for example, watch TV there. What’s the problem? The stairs work very well as seating but not as a replacement for a lounge area. A two-person armchair will still fit downstairs, even if the architect didn’t include it in the plan. By the way, architectural drafts are always meant for adding your own furniture and ideas so you can make changes accordingly.
I would definitely keep it as an island. You have enough floor space at the bottom of the plan, and it’s great when a kitchen island can be accessed from all sides. And 240cm (94 inches) is absolutely sufficient if you only plan one functional area (cooking or washing). I’m more a fan of a sink island, as it allows more freedom in choosing a range hood and, above all, makes it easier to install an effective ventilation system along the wall unit.
H
hanghaus202317 Oct 2025 22:31Congratulations on choosing the architect. I am looking forward to seeing the rest.
dbertig schrieb:
The problem is that we have limited space in the dining room for a comfortable seating and lounging area for the children.You could also consider a window seat.ypg schrieb:
You could also consider a sitting windowI have thought about that as well, and I would really like it. I'm just not sure where exactly. There are two sliding doors planned. Maybe on the south side or rather at the back, facing the larger terrace...
Similar topics