ᐅ Preliminary floor plan design for a 220 m² single-family house
Created on: 20 Jun 2017 22:41
R
R.Hotzenplotz
Hello!
We have already gone through several plans with our architect and I think we are almost there, about to start the detailed planning phase. Before that, I’m looking forward to getting feedback from other users.
Development plan/restrictions: §34 – two full stories
Plot size: 1,085m² (1,1679 yd²)
Basement, floors – 2 full stories plus partial basement
Number of people, ages – 3 people (37, 34, 1, second child planned)
Space requirements on ground floor and upper floor – the requirement was that bedrooms and the study should be about 17m² (183 ft²) each; the entire house should be approximately 220m² (2,368 ft²)
Office: family use
Guests per year: 1
Open or closed architecture: closed
Traditional or modern design: modern
Open kitchen, kitchen island – no open kitchen, but yes to a kitchen island
Number of dining seats – 6
Fireplace – yes
Music/stereo wall – TV wall
Balcony, roof terrace – balcony
Garage, carport – large garage
Additional wishes/special features/daily routines, preferably with reasons why certain things should or should not be included – everyone should be able to sleep as undisturbed as possible in their bedrooms, even if other family members are awake. The husband is sometimes up as early as 4 a.m. Otherwise, watching TV in the evening should be possible without disturbing those sleeping upstairs.
House design
Who created the design:
- Architect (freelancer for a general contractor)
What do you like most? Why?
The upper floor with well-sized rooms and the location of the rooms exactly where they should be (only the washroom area we would still like to move to the outer right corner so that you don’t have to pass it every time you use the toilet). On the ground floor, the access through an airlock, the kitchen, and the dining area with the study next to it are especially liked.
Also appreciated is that after adjustments, the study now faces the garden instead of the street.
What don’t you like? Why?
We originally wanted the distance from wall to wall where the sofa and TV stand is to be about 6.40m (21 ft) (large screen & surround system), but so far only 5.69m (19 ft) has been realized.
Laundry room as described.
Kitchen larger in square meters than needed; the approx. 3m² (32 ft²) could theoretically be used well in the living area.
Price estimate according to architect/planner:
720,000 euros (including construction incidentals)
Personal price limit for the house, including equipment:
800,000 euros
Preferred heating technology:
Gas
If you have to give up on something, which details/features can you do without?
- Can do without:
Technical systems like controlled residential ventilation
- Cannot do without:
Space (except for the kitchen)
Why is the design the way it is now? For example:
Is this a standard design from the planner?
The architect has largely implemented our wishes; the only issue is the living room situation.
What makes it particularly good or bad in your opinion?
Patient, quick to implement, has already gotten to know us well.
No negative points.
Do you notice any other points that might not fit or that we should consider, which we might have overlooked?
In the basement, the room currently labeled as home cinema might possibly be used as one medium- to long-term. For the foreseeable future, it will be a storage room.
We have already gone through several plans with our architect and I think we are almost there, about to start the detailed planning phase. Before that, I’m looking forward to getting feedback from other users.
Development plan/restrictions: §34 – two full stories
Plot size: 1,085m² (1,1679 yd²)
Basement, floors – 2 full stories plus partial basement
Number of people, ages – 3 people (37, 34, 1, second child planned)
Space requirements on ground floor and upper floor – the requirement was that bedrooms and the study should be about 17m² (183 ft²) each; the entire house should be approximately 220m² (2,368 ft²)
Office: family use
Guests per year: 1
Open or closed architecture: closed
Traditional or modern design: modern
Open kitchen, kitchen island – no open kitchen, but yes to a kitchen island
Number of dining seats – 6
Fireplace – yes
Music/stereo wall – TV wall
Balcony, roof terrace – balcony
Garage, carport – large garage
Additional wishes/special features/daily routines, preferably with reasons why certain things should or should not be included – everyone should be able to sleep as undisturbed as possible in their bedrooms, even if other family members are awake. The husband is sometimes up as early as 4 a.m. Otherwise, watching TV in the evening should be possible without disturbing those sleeping upstairs.
House design
Who created the design:
- Architect (freelancer for a general contractor)
What do you like most? Why?
The upper floor with well-sized rooms and the location of the rooms exactly where they should be (only the washroom area we would still like to move to the outer right corner so that you don’t have to pass it every time you use the toilet). On the ground floor, the access through an airlock, the kitchen, and the dining area with the study next to it are especially liked.
Also appreciated is that after adjustments, the study now faces the garden instead of the street.
What don’t you like? Why?
We originally wanted the distance from wall to wall where the sofa and TV stand is to be about 6.40m (21 ft) (large screen & surround system), but so far only 5.69m (19 ft) has been realized.
Laundry room as described.
Kitchen larger in square meters than needed; the approx. 3m² (32 ft²) could theoretically be used well in the living area.
Price estimate according to architect/planner:
720,000 euros (including construction incidentals)
Personal price limit for the house, including equipment:
800,000 euros
Preferred heating technology:
Gas
If you have to give up on something, which details/features can you do without?
- Can do without:
Technical systems like controlled residential ventilation
- Cannot do without:
Space (except for the kitchen)
Why is the design the way it is now? For example:
Is this a standard design from the planner?
The architect has largely implemented our wishes; the only issue is the living room situation.
What makes it particularly good or bad in your opinion?
Patient, quick to implement, has already gotten to know us well.
No negative points.
Do you notice any other points that might not fit or that we should consider, which we might have overlooked?
In the basement, the room currently labeled as home cinema might possibly be used as one medium- to long-term. For the foreseeable future, it will be a storage room.
R
R.Hotzenplotz20 Jul 2017 13:48Still frustrating that we spent weeks moving individual walls back and forth, widening corridors, etc., and now all of that is obsolete. The 1.40 m (4 ft 7 in) corridor width, as well as the 1.10 m (3 ft 7 in) wide stair treads, cannot remain.
The pantry will still be changed, probably the office, basement, and cloakroom as well...
The pantry will still be changed, probably the office, basement, and cloakroom as well...
I would expect an architect to have a bit more basic structural knowledge...
But maybe it’s also a good idea to show the design to another homebuilder: we had one who would have realized our design with just a steel beam in the middle.
We can do without that now (he was the only one); however, we do have an architect who is very familiar with structural engineering (according to one homebuilder: if I get plans from him, I know they’ll work and can be built as is). He also trained as a carpenter before studying architecture.
But maybe it’s also a good idea to show the design to another homebuilder: we had one who would have realized our design with just a steel beam in the middle.
We can do without that now (he was the only one); however, we do have an architect who is very familiar with structural engineering (according to one homebuilder: if I get plans from him, I know they’ll work and can be built as is). He also trained as a carpenter before studying architecture.
R.Hotzenplotz schrieb:
The hipped roof solution is most likely. About 6000 euros cheaper than the flat roof. And with the flat roof, the architect's stylish design couldn’t be structurally realized. Either you have a distinctive face, or you don’t. The same applies to houses. You can’t just build the same house with a variety of different roof styles – in my opinion, that’s not aesthetically feasible.
R.Hotzenplotz schrieb:
The 1.40m (4 ft 7 in) hallway width can’t remain, just like the 1.10m (3 ft 7 in) wide stair treads. So what’s the alternative then?
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
R
R.Hotzenplotz20 Jul 2017 18:57Apparently, the architect increased the house size to almost 240m² (2,583 sq ft) without consulting me. He always told me it was 220m² (2,368 sq ft). But I never added it all up.
And there is no budget available for such a large area.
And there is no budget available for such a large area.
T
Traumfaenger20 Jul 2017 20:0211ant schrieb:
Either you have a distinctive character, or you don’t. The same applies to houses. You can’t just build the same house with all kinds of different roof styles – in my opinion, that isn’t aesthetically feasible. I fully agree with 11ant; you can’t simply put a hip roof or something similar on a house originally designed in the Bauhaus style. In my opinion, your cantilevered roof on the street-facing side doesn’t look right with a hip roof. The entire design no longer feels coherent this way (just my opinion). I would recommend redesigning if you want to use a different roof style.
Similar topics