ᐅ Floor plan of a single-family house approximately 170 m², without a basement, featuring a carport

Created on: 6 Jun 2022 20:07
S
SandyBlack
Questionnaire about your floor plan

Development plan / Restrictions

Plot size 477 m² (5,134 ft²)
Slope No
Site coverage ratio 0.3
Floor area ratio 0.8
Building envelope, building line and boundary 14 x 14 meters (46 x 46 feet)
Setbacks South/North 5 m (16 ft); East/West 2.50 m (8 ft)
Number of parking spaces 2 (side by side)
Number of floors 2
Roof type Gable roof
Architectural style
Orientation East/West
Maximum heights / limits
Other regulations

Homeowners’ requirements
Style, roof type, building type Gable roof
Basement, floors No basement, 2 floors
Number of people, ages 3: 33, 32, and 1.5 years (4th planned)
Space requirements on ground floor, upper floor
Ground floor: kitchen, living room, guest room, guest WC/shower, utility room, storage room, pantry
Upper floor: bathroom, laundry room, work corner, bedroom, 2 children’s rooms
Office: family use or home office? Home office 3 days per week
Guests per year approx. once a month grandparents visit overnight; plus approx. 3–6 additional visits per year
Open or closed architecture open
Conservative or modern construction modern?
Open kitchen, kitchen island open, island preferred but not a must
Number of dining seats
Fireplace No
Music/home cinema wall Guest room to include “cinema”; 7.2.4 speakers + screen or TV
Balcony, roof terrace No
Garage, carport Double carport (5.50 m wide x 6 m long (18 x 20 ft) + storage room (5.5 m wide x 3 m long [18 x 10 ft])
Utility garden, greenhouse No

House design
Who designed it:
- Architect Architect of the house supplier
What do you like most? Why? Open layout; living room somewhat separated; straight staircase (not a must); guest WC not directly by the entrance but nicely connected to guest room; long corridor upstairs for window seat and extra play area for children; large children’s rooms; large bathroom; appealing corner terrace solution possible (NW)
What don’t you like? Why? Pantry too small – probably not very practical this way; guest room too small – integrating cinema difficult; living room too narrow (3.50 m / 11.5 ft); only 1 m (3.3 ft) width between staircase and wall (too narrow?); guest WC big enough?; kitchen too small? Kitchen (half) island probably hard to implement well; no dedicated home office space

Estimated price according to architect/planner: 500,000
Personal price limit for house including fixtures: 550,000
Preferred heating technology: air-to-water heat pump

If you have to give up, which details/extensions
- can you do without: straight staircase; guest WC not next to front door; kitchen island; possibly pantry accessible from kitchen; children’s rooms could be a bit smaller
- can’t you do without: guest room; open kitchen/dining area; guest WC with shower; home office space; bathroom with walk-in, level-access shower & bathtub

Why has the design turned out the way it is? E.g. standard design from planner? Developed jointly according to our wishes
What makes it especially good or bad in your view? Many of our wishes already implemented

What is the most important/basic question about the floor plan in 130 characters?

Are we overlooking anything fundamental? What changes should we make? Is a narrow corridor a big issue?

The carport is planned as a double carport on the south side adjoining the recess of the utility room. It is intended to be 5.5 m (18 ft) wide x 9 m (30 ft) long, including a storage room with a length of 3 m (10 ft). Is the planned width sufficient for two cars side by side assuming no SUVs? We plan to use a station wagon like a Skoda Superb and a small car such as a Mercedes A-Class or Toyota Leaf.
The carport positioning is planned as follows:

Floor plan of a plot plan with the buildings barn and inn plus boundary dimensions.

The house itself would be pushed fully to the eastern building boundary to maximize the western garden area.

The current floor plan from the architect looks like this:

Two floor plans: ground floor left with kitchen, living; upper floor right with bathroom, bedrooms.


We have already considered some optimizations.
Central to our considerations is adding a second recess on the north side where the living room is, measuring 1 m (3.3 ft) long and 4 m (13 ft) wide, and including a laundry room on the upper floor to house washer and dryer.
This would allow reducing the size of the utility room on the ground floor significantly. We would shorten the utility room by 0.7 m (2.3 ft), leaving about 9 m² (97 ft²). The freed-up space would benefit the guest WC, guest room, and living room.

In the kitchen, we would like to extend the pantry fully along the wall and place the kitchen before it. We have tried to mark our ideas on the floor plan:

Floor plan of a house with living/dining, kitchen, study, hall, utility and WC/shower.

Is the kitchen large enough for a household of 3 to 4 people? An island solution will probably be difficult to realize, right?

Upstairs, the gained space from the recess would be used for the laundry room. In the plan shown below, we placed the study next to the laundry room; however, we have reconsidered and now prefer to position the work corner where the storage space currently is. The work corner doesn’t need much space, primarily just a desk about 1.60 m (5.2 ft) wide. If there is room for a small cabinet, that’s nice but not essential. Where we marked the study, we would instead plan a walk-in closet. Unfortunately, we have not found a better location for the work corner. We also considered moving it near the children’s rooms, but then the child bedrooms would probably become rather small (about 12–13 m² / 130–140 ft²). These will definitely be adjusted to the same size regardless.
Maybe you have some ideas.
The windows on the ground and upper floor are not finalized yet; these are currently placeholders.
We welcome all comments 🙂.

Upper floor plan: corridor, children’s rooms, bedroom, walk-in, laundry, bathroom, storage.


P.S.: Here is the old planning thread:
https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/bebauung-Grundstück-keller-ja-oder-nein.42556/

The planning has fundamentally changed since then, and the plot has meanwhile been remeasured.

Site plan: colored building zones, green outlined rectangle with N, blue square buildings.


Site plan: parcels 6803, 6777, and 6802 with boundary lines, measurements and north arrow.


Site plan of a plot with boundary lines, parcel numbers and measurements.


Site plan of a plot with buildings, parcels, road layout and scale 1:500.
C
cryptoki
10 Jun 2022 23:27
SandyBlack schrieb:

Having the photovoltaic system on the south side is certainly not a bad idea. But east/west orientation has advantages when it comes to self-consumption.

A photovoltaic system will produce so much electricity in summer that you won’t be able to use it all yourself. The weak point of photovoltaics remains the winter, especially in northern regions. There are excellent charts and tools available that estimate expected yields based on orientation and angle. These often show a clear overview for all months of the year.
SandyBlack schrieb:

But true – I hadn’t considered the shading. It will certainly be less with an east/west gable. However, we are currently planning two full stories with a knee wall of 2.80 meters (9 feet 2 inches), but maybe it would be worth considering reducing this to, for example, 1.80 meters (5 feet 11 inches) for the north-facing garden. That could also save some money. 😉

Different concepts mean different considerations. This needs to align, among other things, with the planned windows. Roof slopes and skylights versus full ceiling height and regular windows. The roof slope also plays a major role.
S
SandyBlack
11 Jun 2022 07:47
cryptoki schrieb:

A photovoltaic system will generate so much electricity in summer that you won’t be able to use it all yourself. The weak point of photovoltaics remains the winter in our latitudes, especially in the north. There are great charts and tools available that provide a forecast of the expected yield based on orientation and angle. These are nicely displayed as diagrams covering all months of the year.

That’s true, but with an east/west orientation, you have sunlight from early morning until late evening, providing electricity from the photovoltaic system for a longer part of the day. That’s why east/west is optimal in terms of self-consumption. For example, PVGIS shows this for us as well. But as I said, south is by no means bad and would also work for us. The points you and Katja raised are definitely more important to us.
cryptoki schrieb:

Different concepts mean different considerations. This has to be consistent with, among other things, the planned windows: roof slopes and skylights versus full ceiling height and regular windows. The roof slope is also a major factor.

Yes, that’s correct. We are very grateful to receive such great support here. However, if possible, we want to avoid skylights. Therefore, I think the knee wall should not be lower than 1.80 meters (5 feet 11 inches).
K a t j a11 Jun 2022 11:50
I think this option would offer a better price-to-performance ratio:


Floor plan of a house with living room, kitchen, bathroom, bedroom, stairwell, and terrace.


Floor plan: open living and dining area on the left, stairs in the middle, guest and media rooms on the right, WC.


Floor plan of a house with kitchen, office, bathroom, and hallway areas.


110 sqm (1,184 sq ft) fully utilized. Simple construction style. The media room is small, but with a pantry and separate utility room on the upper floor it should be sufficient. The stairs are a tight landing design with little room for modifications.
S
SandyBlack
11 Jun 2022 17:25
So far, we like the floor plan best 🙂

The landing staircase is great. Would there be any objection to having a storage space under the stairs? Are the dimensions for landing staircases standardized? We need to check if our supplier offers a landing staircase with those dimensions.

Regarding the utility room on the ground floor, we also need to confirm whether it can be that small. The utility room upstairs is quite large, but I suspect all the technical equipment needs to be located on the ground floor.

If necessary, it might also be possible to extend the house by 30 cm (12 inches).

Upstairs, the utility room and the office are even larger than we need. However, we probably lack enough space in the bedroom for our bed and bedside tables. Our bed is 2.20 meters (7 feet 3 inches) wide, and our current bedside tables are 0.73 meters (29 inches) wide—though narrower ones are certainly available. But I think we would need about 3.20 meters (10 feet 6 inches) to fit the bed and bedside tables comfortably. That might already be possible if the house length is adjusted to 9 meters (30 feet) because of the technical room anyway.
Y
ypg
11 Jun 2022 18:00
I also like it very much!

However, something else occurred to me while reading (I’ll skip looking for the exact quote). If you sign a contract for about 110 sqm (1,184 sq ft) and are told that additional square meters cost a certain amount (I believe it was around €2,000), the main contractor is obviously referring to the same level of house features, for example, a house with 3 rooms and 7 windows. If you then plan for over 60 sqm (645 sq ft) more and end up with 2-3 additional rooms, each requiring its own windows, separate heating circuits, electrical installations, etc., the stated additional cost might not be accurate.

If I were you, I would check with the main contractor early on.
S
SandyBlack
11 Jun 2022 18:16
I think we were unclear about what we signed with the general contractor (GC), because you write that we would be planning over 60 sqm (650 sq ft) more. The mentioned 110 sqm (1,185 sq ft) that we signed with the GC always referred to the footprint – not the living area. Based purely on the area, Katja’s design would therefore almost break even. The approximately 2,000 euros more also referred to per square meter of footprint. The number of windows could of course vary and lead to additional costs. But if, for example, we lowered the knee wall from 2.80 meters (9 ft 2 in) to 1.80 meters (6 ft), we could save several thousand euros again. Due to the north orientation, I think this would make sense anyway.

But in any case, we will seek a meeting with our GC next week.