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.Hotzenplotz17 Aug 2017 21:45winnetou78 schrieb:
Well, the house was priced around 800,000, so I think this Bauhaus style would be more than appropriate. If suddenly it turns into a hipped roof and a brick facade like a townhouse, I find that disappointing for the price.The house that was planned and liked was technically too complex or not really buildable, as was pointed out here. We then tried to simplify the construction. But we don’t really like a less complex house with a flat roof. If at all, only with the massive roof overhang, which actually can’t be built...
I have already tried to take the advice here into account. However, due to all the risks and critical points regarding the originally approved plan, we moved away from it. I find nothing worse than “Bauhaus” houses that look like a cube. No play of colors in the plaster finish helps with that.
W
winnetou7817 Aug 2017 21:50Always remember, this is a forum. Surely some people here have expertise, but whether something can actually be built or not, I personally wouldn’t leave that decision to anyone from a forum. It should be up to the architect.
R.Hotzenplotz schrieb:
...
I have already tried to take the advice given here into account. However, due to all the risks and criticisms concerning the originally approved design, we decided to deviate from it. I find nothing worse than “box houses” that look like cubes. No amount of color variation in the plaster finish will help with that.That wasn’t really the impression I got either.
This nowadays minimalist Bauhaus style has some distinctive features, such as elongated facades with a double garage, interior walls without unnecessary corners, and straight lines.
The previously mentioned open-detail planning also suggested that it was meant to be like that, but possibly with 20/30cm (8/12 inches) more or less, more extensive or arranged differently.
People thought you were confused about the roof...
Last but not least, it must be said that you can’t just take any design and apply it to both architectural styles, as @11ant often points out. “Can” is in quotation marks because many homeowners nowadays are unfortunately indifferent to style and culture and simply have no interest in these things. That’s how some box houses end up with hipped roofs and lavender-colored walls.
R
R.Hotzenplotz17 Aug 2017 23:27winnetou78 schrieb:
Always keep in mind, this is a forum; surely some people here have knowledge, but whether something is buildable or not is, in my opinion, not a decision to be made by just anyone from a forum, but by the architect.In the end, he himself said that it was not buildable or only buildable with major changes that significantly altered the character of the originally approved design.
R
R.Hotzenplotz18 Aug 2017 09:13ypg schrieb:
The mentioned preliminary detailed planning suggested that it should be like that, but possibly 20/30cm (8/12 inches) less or more, covering the full area or arranged differently. We had tried that. However, it turned out that the visualization no longer matched the architect’s original rendering afterward. For example, I recall the massive "block" below the left first-floor window. I posted a comparison image somewhere here. Also, after reducing the size, the dimensions of the bay window—which was never really preferred anyway—no longer fit. Everything no longer appeared Bauhaus-style and elongated but instead looked like a previous design was simply compressed.
ypg schrieb:
"Can" is in quotation marks because nowadays most homeowners frankly don’t care about style and culture, as they just have no interest. That’s how some houses end up with hipped roofs and lavender-colored walls. However, the planners partly approach this purely functionally. In our case, the discussion was not about styles or similar but solely about what we like and our preferences.
Additionally, the remarks about pre-existing issues with thermal bridges really scared me.
T
Traumfaenger18 Aug 2017 22:41winnetou78 schrieb:
Well, the house price was indicated at 800,000, so I think this Bauhaus style would be more than fitting.
If suddenly a hipped roof and a brick facade like a town villa appear, I find that somewhat disappointing for the price.I can only agree with winnetou78. 800,000 EUR for a town villa with a hipped roof seems an unreasonable price. Who is pressuring you to finalize the planning now? I would suggest putting the project aside for a few days and then, with some distance, reconsider whether a very expensive compromise has been made. Is this design really what you want? And if you had to sell it, would you get that much money for it? Is this house design worth that?
Similar topics