ᐅ Structural Advantage Upper Floor

Hello everyone,
we are currently planning our house and want to add a 1m (3 ft) extension with a width of 5m (16 ft) on the ground floor to enlarge the living area. Our architect has informed us that we would no longer be able to install floor-to-ceiling windows on the upper floor because the wall above would need a structural reinforcement along the full 5m (16 ft) length. This reinforcement would likely be about 50cm (20 inches) high, but I don’t know the exact measurements yet. I would like to know if anyone has experience with this and if there are alternative solutions to minimize the height of this structural reinforcement?
Best regards, Simon

So, on the ground floor, a 1m (3 feet) deep bay window that continues on the upper floor as well? What is underneath it? An empty space?

Then, as a layperson, that already sounds problematic to me.

Just like here, but approximately with no windows on the side.

And as you can see, it’s the same there. No floor-to-ceiling windows. And to me, that seems logical. If you want floor-to-ceiling windows that are 5 meters wide (16 feet), they need proper support for their weight. A 5-meter (16 feet) wide opening with a ceiling thickness of around 20 cm (8 inches) and the weight of triple-glazed windows is probably difficult to manage. The only way to reduce the issue would be to have supports within the 5 meters again. However, a structural engineer here (or in the green forum ) can answer that—now I’m getting a bit too far into the non-floor-to-ceiling window topic.

What can also be seen is a completely different problem beyond the structural aspect (that should somehow be manageable, I think—if necessary, you could just include a steel beam in the ceiling at that point, then 20cm (8 inches) would be sufficient). The drainage and "roof insulation" of the bay window are apparently so thick that floor-to-ceiling windows simply don’t fit above it! And it can’t be made any thinner because the energy saving regulations must be met.

Hello everyone, thanks again for the replies, but I need to revisit this topic. This morning, on my way to work, I saw the following. It seems that it’s possible to do it this way as well. They simply extended the roof at the top. Now my question is, which is more cost-effective: extending the roof at the top or managing drainage over the bay window? What do you think?