ᐅ Floor Plan Design for a Single-Family Home of Approximately 150 m²
Created on: 12 Feb 2018 18:09
C
chrisw81
Hello,
After a long search, we signed the notarized contract for the land purchase at the end of December. We are now actively planning the floor plan. Unfortunately, the plot is somewhat awkwardly shaped (not rectangular), which creates some limitations for the layout from our perspective. We already have a first draft, but there are several areas we don’t like and are unsure how to improve. Maybe you have some ideas; we would appreciate your input.
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 601 m² (6465 sq ft)
Building envelope, building line, boundary: Building line with the house on the west side
Peripheral setbacks: 7 m (23 ft) from the street (north), otherwise the usual 3 m (10 ft)
Number of parking spaces: 2 desired
Number of floors: 1 full story allowed
Roof style: Gable roof
Design style: open construction method
Orientation: South
Maximum heights / limits: Ridge height max. 8.5 m (28 ft)
Additional requirements: Max. 100 m² (1076 sq ft) of built-up area
Client Requirements
Style, roof form, building type: Solid construction house, rectangular, no bay windows, no projections, etc., gable roof
Basement, floors: no basement; 1.5 stories
Number and age of residents: 2 people, age between 30 and 40, possibly children later
Space needs on ground floor and upper floor: Ground floor – living/dining room, kitchen, guest toilet, utility room, office
Office: family use or home office?: family use
Guest stays per year: 20 days
Open or closed architecture: open living area, closed hallway
Conservative or modern style: conservative
Open kitchen, kitchen island: open kitchen, island without cooktop
Number of dining seats: 2-4
Fireplace: yes, chimney planned
Music/stereo wall: no
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: carport
Utility garden, greenhouse: no
Further wishes, special features, daily routine, and reasons for preferences:
- A wardrobe area on the ground floor is important where coats can be stored relatively out of sight.
- On the upper floor, it would be nice to have an open gallery with a desk or similar (not a must and not necessarily next to the stairs).
- A walk-in closet would be nice but not essential.
- A storage room on the upper floor is very important since we do not have a basement.
House Design
Who created the design:
- Basic design by the construction company (FIBAV Stadthaus Vision Studio)
- DIY modifications based on online floor plans (especially Viebrockhaus Maxime 330)
What do you particularly like? Why?:
- Layout of the living/dining area and the narrowing kitchen reduces the hallway effect a bit
- Many windows in the living/dining area
- Wide hallway on the ground floor
What do you dislike? Why?:
- Few options to place furniture (dresser, wardrobe) in the ground floor hallway due to many doors
- Very large hallway upstairs, considered wasted space
- Bedroom is quite small; should be the largest room upstairs (preferably 16 m² (172 sq ft), children’s rooms rather 14 m² (151 sq ft))
- Stair placement limited by chimney location
- Door placement upstairs limited by chimney
- A staircase rotated 90 degrees (entrance next to front door) would appeal more
- Difficult to align windows upstairs and downstairs on the gable end vertically
- Floor-to-ceiling windows upstairs; wider windows with a sill height around 100 cm (40 inches) would be preferred
Price estimate by architect/planner: 200,000 €
Personal price limit for the house including equipment: 210,000 €
Preferred heating technology: gas heating
What details or expansions could you give up?
- Can do without: gallery next to stairs upstairs. Living area could also be narrower (e.g., 4.20 m (14 ft) instead of 4.47 m (15 ft))
- Cannot do without: storage room upstairs, shower in guest toilet, extra natural light in the ground floor hallway (e.g., side panel on front door or window)
Why was the design made this way? For example, standard plan from planner?
- Since the house has very little space on the south side, the house should be very narrow in order not to waste more space to the south. It should be wider so that living, dining, and kitchen areas face south as much as possible.
Were corresponding wishes from the architect implemented? No architect meeting has taken place yet.
What is the most important/basic question about the floor plan summarized in 130 characters?
How can the ground floor hallway be better designed to fit a wardrobe? Can the stairs be positioned better or replaced? Should the hallway be enlarged and living space reduced? How can the upstairs hallway be better utilized? Can the bedroom be enlarged? Is it possible to swap the bedroom with another room, e.g., move it to the southeast to allow a walk-in closet?
Thank you very much in advance for your criticism and suggestions!
After a long search, we signed the notarized contract for the land purchase at the end of December. We are now actively planning the floor plan. Unfortunately, the plot is somewhat awkwardly shaped (not rectangular), which creates some limitations for the layout from our perspective. We already have a first draft, but there are several areas we don’t like and are unsure how to improve. Maybe you have some ideas; we would appreciate your input.
Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 601 m² (6465 sq ft)
Building envelope, building line, boundary: Building line with the house on the west side
Peripheral setbacks: 7 m (23 ft) from the street (north), otherwise the usual 3 m (10 ft)
Number of parking spaces: 2 desired
Number of floors: 1 full story allowed
Roof style: Gable roof
Design style: open construction method
Orientation: South
Maximum heights / limits: Ridge height max. 8.5 m (28 ft)
Additional requirements: Max. 100 m² (1076 sq ft) of built-up area
Client Requirements
Style, roof form, building type: Solid construction house, rectangular, no bay windows, no projections, etc., gable roof
Basement, floors: no basement; 1.5 stories
Number and age of residents: 2 people, age between 30 and 40, possibly children later
Space needs on ground floor and upper floor: Ground floor – living/dining room, kitchen, guest toilet, utility room, office
Office: family use or home office?: family use
Guest stays per year: 20 days
Open or closed architecture: open living area, closed hallway
Conservative or modern style: conservative
Open kitchen, kitchen island: open kitchen, island without cooktop
Number of dining seats: 2-4
Fireplace: yes, chimney planned
Music/stereo wall: no
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: carport
Utility garden, greenhouse: no
Further wishes, special features, daily routine, and reasons for preferences:
- A wardrobe area on the ground floor is important where coats can be stored relatively out of sight.
- On the upper floor, it would be nice to have an open gallery with a desk or similar (not a must and not necessarily next to the stairs).
- A walk-in closet would be nice but not essential.
- A storage room on the upper floor is very important since we do not have a basement.
House Design
Who created the design:
- Basic design by the construction company (FIBAV Stadthaus Vision Studio)
- DIY modifications based on online floor plans (especially Viebrockhaus Maxime 330)
What do you particularly like? Why?:
- Layout of the living/dining area and the narrowing kitchen reduces the hallway effect a bit
- Many windows in the living/dining area
- Wide hallway on the ground floor
What do you dislike? Why?:
- Few options to place furniture (dresser, wardrobe) in the ground floor hallway due to many doors
- Very large hallway upstairs, considered wasted space
- Bedroom is quite small; should be the largest room upstairs (preferably 16 m² (172 sq ft), children’s rooms rather 14 m² (151 sq ft))
- Stair placement limited by chimney location
- Door placement upstairs limited by chimney
- A staircase rotated 90 degrees (entrance next to front door) would appeal more
- Difficult to align windows upstairs and downstairs on the gable end vertically
- Floor-to-ceiling windows upstairs; wider windows with a sill height around 100 cm (40 inches) would be preferred
Price estimate by architect/planner: 200,000 €
Personal price limit for the house including equipment: 210,000 €
Preferred heating technology: gas heating
What details or expansions could you give up?
- Can do without: gallery next to stairs upstairs. Living area could also be narrower (e.g., 4.20 m (14 ft) instead of 4.47 m (15 ft))
- Cannot do without: storage room upstairs, shower in guest toilet, extra natural light in the ground floor hallway (e.g., side panel on front door or window)
Why was the design made this way? For example, standard plan from planner?
- Since the house has very little space on the south side, the house should be very narrow in order not to waste more space to the south. It should be wider so that living, dining, and kitchen areas face south as much as possible.
Were corresponding wishes from the architect implemented? No architect meeting has taken place yet.
What is the most important/basic question about the floor plan summarized in 130 characters?
How can the ground floor hallway be better designed to fit a wardrobe? Can the stairs be positioned better or replaced? Should the hallway be enlarged and living space reduced? How can the upstairs hallway be better utilized? Can the bedroom be enlarged? Is it possible to swap the bedroom with another room, e.g., move it to the southeast to allow a walk-in closet?
Thank you very much in advance for your criticism and suggestions!
chrisw81 schrieb:
Yes, in principle there are, of course, these house sides – but in practice, usually not ???
Whether rectangular or L-shaped, almost everyone designs floor plans with parallel walls. Bungalows often have hip roofs, meaning eaves on all sides. But your case – a rectangle with a gable roof – is not exactly uncommon. Two gable ends and two eaves sides; if we exclude the north side as a potential conservatory area, that leaves three. And hardly any floor plan – including yours – is equally suitable on all three sides for attaching something useful and harmonious.
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Quick update: we now have the building permit (planning permission). It was approved; the only requirement was to remove the terrace because it extended into the 3m (10 feet) boundary zone.
Otherwise, we will now get a quote for a centralized mechanical ventilation system with heat recovery. Hopefully, it won’t be too expensive. The chimney planning is still pending.
We are also considering how to position the two parking spaces. Placing them next to the house would be a significant waste of space, as a 5m (16 feet) clearance must be maintained in front. It would be nice to use the area directly at the driveway, maybe even roof just one parking spot.
Otherwise, we will now get a quote for a centralized mechanical ventilation system with heat recovery. Hopefully, it won’t be too expensive. The chimney planning is still pending.
We are also considering how to position the two parking spaces. Placing them next to the house would be a significant waste of space, as a 5m (16 feet) clearance must be maintained in front. It would be nice to use the area directly at the driveway, maybe even roof just one parking spot.
I just heard from my partner while we were standing in our nearly finished house that she would like to have a direct route from the kitchen to the living room, without a large “detour” around the dining table.
I think that would be possible with a small table, but when it’s extended and there are more guests, it would be really difficult to access the sliding door, which unfortunately is located where the table stands. I believe there should be at least 1 m (3.3 ft) of clear space to comfortably reach the sliding door.
She was a bit shocked by that realization.
In hindsight, I might have placed the piano somewhere else, for example, not made the fireplace so large, and instead made the sliding door wider (about 3.5–4 m (11.5–13 ft)) or even added an extra door next to the sofa. I just hope it doesn’t get too cramped around the dining table, what do you think?
I was thinking of positioning the table about 1 m (3.3 ft) away from the sliding door, perpendicular to the window as shown in the picture, but then the passage between the chair and the piano is quite narrow... or are there better layout options? We have also considered a round table...
Unfortunately, the architect didn’t point out this issue, and it didn’t seem to be a concern here in the forum either. Maybe it’s not a problem after all, but my partner has made me a bit anxious about it now...
Attached again is the floor plan of the ground floor with the “problem”
.
I think that would be possible with a small table, but when it’s extended and there are more guests, it would be really difficult to access the sliding door, which unfortunately is located where the table stands. I believe there should be at least 1 m (3.3 ft) of clear space to comfortably reach the sliding door.
She was a bit shocked by that realization.
In hindsight, I might have placed the piano somewhere else, for example, not made the fireplace so large, and instead made the sliding door wider (about 3.5–4 m (11.5–13 ft)) or even added an extra door next to the sofa. I just hope it doesn’t get too cramped around the dining table, what do you think?
I was thinking of positioning the table about 1 m (3.3 ft) away from the sliding door, perpendicular to the window as shown in the picture, but then the passage between the chair and the piano is quite narrow... or are there better layout options? We have also considered a round table...
Unfortunately, the architect didn’t point out this issue, and it didn’t seem to be a concern here in the forum either. Maybe it’s not a problem after all, but my partner has made me a bit anxious about it now...
Attached again is the floor plan of the ground floor with the “problem”
What speaks against turning the table 90° and placing it a bit closer to the fireplace?
At around 2m (6.5 feet) across, it already gets a bit tight that way, but it’s still doable.
When you extend it to 3m (9.8 feet), there are usually limitations anyway, as few dining areas are large enough to avoid even a small detour.
At around 2m (6.5 feet) across, it already gets a bit tight that way, but it’s still doable.
When you extend it to 3m (9.8 feet), there are usually limitations anyway, as few dining areas are large enough to avoid even a small detour.
Personally, I wouldn’t be ashamed to slightly turn the table out of a perfectly "straight" position, but I am surprised that after all the endless nitpicking you’re only now involving such a significant person as a life partner (?)
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
apokolok schrieb:
What speaks against turning the table 90° and positioning it a bit closer to the fireplace?
Across at 2m (6.5 feet) it gets a bit tight, but it’s still doable.
When you extend it to 3m (9.8 feet), there are usually some limitations anyway—most dining areas aren’t that large to begin with, so you often have to take a small detour. If it’s closer to the fireplace, you end up with less clearance for passage there.
I also think it works across up to 2m (6.5 feet). Maybe you get more lengthwise. But as you said, it might not be so important that everything is perfectly accessible in large dining areas. Although, for example, 2.4m (7.9 feet) isn’t that much either—that would only fit about 8 to 10 people at the table. I wonder how others handle it when more people show up.
Similar topics