ᐅ Floor Plan Assessment – Saving Square Meters in a Single-Family Home

Development Plan / Restrictions
Plot size: 751 sqm (about 27x27 m / 89x89 ft)
Slope: approximately 1.2 m (4 ft) across the entire width according to the map
Site coverage ratio: 0.35
Floor area ratio: 0.70
Building window, building line, and boundary: present – accounted for in the plan
Edge development
Number of parking spaces: no regulation
Number of floors: basement, ground floor, upper floor
Roof type: any preferred
Architectural style: any preferred
Orientation: any preferred
Maximum heights / limits:
Additional specifications: basically, you can build as you want... bungalow, Tuscan style, gable roof, hip roof... can stand side by side. Orientation does not matter, etc. I can also send the development plan via private message if desired.

Client Requirements
Architectural style, roof type, building type: gable roof 22°
Basement, number of floors: 2 full floors
Number of occupants, age: currently 2... 35 and 38 years old – third person in progress
Space requirements on ground floor, upper floor: we said 140-150 sqm (about 1500-1600 sq ft) living area
Office: family use or home office? both
Guests per year: 0-2?!
Open or closed layout: open
Conservative or modern construction: modern
Open kitchen, kitchen island: kitchen island
Number of dining seats: 4
Fireplace: optional
Music/system wall: no
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: double garage with workshop since no basement
Vegetable garden, greenhouse: possibly later
Additional wishes / special features / daily routine, also reasons why some things should or should not be included

House Design
Who created the design: planner from a construction company
What do you particularly like? Why? shape, exterior appearance, utility room
What do you not like? Why? probably too large/expensive with 168 sqm (about 1810 sq ft)
Price estimate according to architect/planner: none so far
Personal price limit for the house, including equipment: 450k (without garage, outdoor areas)
Preferred heating technology: air-to-water heat pump... but possibly mandated district heating... nothing certain yet

If You Have to Give Up Something, which details / extensions
-can you give up:
-can you not give up:

Why is the design as it is now?
Example:
Standard design from planner? no
Which wishes were implemented by the architect? yes
What, in your opinion, makes it particularly good or bad?

We had expressed that it should have 140-150 sqm (about 1500-1600 sq ft) living area (we thought including the utility room) but it is now 168 sqm (about 1810 sq ft).
We would really like a kitchen island, and the kitchen planner noted that for the cabinet run opposite the island, at least 4 m (13 ft) is needed. Here it is 4.08 m (13 ft 5 in), so that is fine. We just suspect the house will go over budget (however, we have not yet received an estimate). It will be built in northeastern Bavaria near the border with the Czech Republic.
We personally see potential savings mainly on the upper floor in the bedroom and bathroom... but then where to reduce space on the ground floor? According to the builder, the staircase is the most space-saving design. We are not fixed on the stair shape.
The utility room is planned to accommodate a central ventilation system, air-to-water heat pump, inverter, and perhaps later a battery storage system. Also, 2 m (6.5 ft) of wall space for various cabinets.

In your opinion, where could space be saved without ending up, for example, with only a 50 cm (20 inch) wide passage in the kitchen and everything feeling cramped?
The garage and outdoor areas are planned to be built in 1-2 years. So currently, it is only about the house itself.

Thank you for your opinions

You could reduce the plan by 0.3–0.5 sqm (3.2–5.4 sq ft) on the top and left sides. This way, you would save approximately 12 or 20 sqm (130 or 215 sq ft) in total. It is also possible to do this on just one side. Even then, the floor plan would only need minimal adjustments, and the rooms would essentially remain as originally designed.

Seb_Opf schrieb:

What don’t you like? Why? Probably too large/expensive at 168 sqm (1810 sq ft)

If I were to object to it being too expensive, the lack of support for the corner window would be the first thing I would remove. As a source of inspiration, I recommend, for similarity’s sake (although with a different orientation of the house’s axis to the slope), the thread by @Zaba12 https://www.hausbau-forum.de/threads/grundriss-fuer-11m-x-8-25m-ok.24781/

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

The construction cost could also be reduced by removing the corner window on the ground floor, as it does not provide any additional benefits compared to standard windows.

With the nearly square building shape, you have a lot of circulation space in the middle of the rooms and very little where it would be useful.
Since you have a third person working on the project ( 🙂 ), usable space in the hallway is always a good thing. On the other hand, the technical room can be a bit more compact until it fits.
Get rid of the pantry if you want to save floor area; the walk-in closet can be smaller or removed as well, and the double access to the technical room can be eliminated.

If the house were more elongated, it would be easier to save space. With square shapes, this is more difficult.

The kitchen is more of a space-consuming status symbol in its current layout. With the narrow spacing between countertops and the corners of the U-shape, it isn’t even very practical.