ᐅ Floor Plan Design for a 180 m² Single-Family Home with South-Facing Driveway – Challenging Layouts
Created on: 16 Feb 2024 23:10
C
Cubus3f
Development Plan/Restrictions
Plot size: 450m2 (4,844 sq ft)
Slope: No
Floor Area Ratio (FAR): 0.4
Gross Floor Area Ratio (GFAR): 0.8
Building envelope, building line, and boundary: Plot measures 18.36 x 24.49 meters (60.2 x 80.4 feet); building envelopes are set back 3 meters (10 feet) to the north, east, and west, and 5 meters (16.4 feet) to the south (street side)
Edge development: Yes
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of stories: 2
Roof type: Flat roof
Style: modern, open
Orientation: south/west
Maximum heights/limits:
Additional regulations: Moderately busy street to the south; a multi-family building is located to the north
Client Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: modern, open, flat roof
Basement, stories: No basement, 2 full stories
Number of occupants, ages: 2 middle-aged adults, 2 children (6 and 1 year old)
Space requirements ground floor, upper floor: Ground floor 100m² (1,076 sq ft), upper floor 80m² (861 sq ft)
Office: family use or home office? Home office
Guests per year: 2 persons, 3 times per year
Open or closed architecture: open
Conservative or modern construction: modern
Open kitchen, kitchen island
Number of dining seats: 8
Fireplace: no
Music/stereo wall: no
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: both yes
Vegetable garden, greenhouse: no
Additional wishes/particulars/daily routine, including reasons for preferences:
Living and dining areas as much as possible facing south
Kitchen with freestanding island and partly open pantry around the corner
House Design
Designed by:
- Planner from a construction company
- Architect
What do you particularly like? Why? Workshop at the back, bicycle stand, size of children’s rooms, master bedroom area on the north side, staircase option 1
What do you dislike? Why? Very small garden, especially between the terrace and neighboring house
Option 1:
Ground floor:
Upper floor:
Option 2:
Ground floor:
Upper floor:
Price estimate according to architect/planner: 3,200 €/m2
Personal price limit for house including fixtures: 700,000 €
Preferred heating system: heat pump
If you had to give up some features/finishes, which ones?
- Can give up: open staircase
- Cannot give up: pantry, kitchen with island, utility room on upper floor, children’s bathroom, large dressing room
Why is the design like it is now? For example:
Standard design from the planner? Architect developed options 1 & 2 after consultation
Which of your wishes were implemented by the architect?
A mix of many examples from various magazines...
What do you think are the particular strengths or weaknesses of the design?
Do you have suggestions on how we should plan the living/dining/kitchen area to create an L-shaped layout? There should be space for a kitchen island (2.35m x 1.1m) (7.7 x 3.6 feet). The staircase should be placed centrally in the house to improve the layout of the upper floor rooms.
Any other improvement suggestions?
Many thanks
Cubus3f
Plot size: 450m2 (4,844 sq ft)
Slope: No
Floor Area Ratio (FAR): 0.4
Gross Floor Area Ratio (GFAR): 0.8
Building envelope, building line, and boundary: Plot measures 18.36 x 24.49 meters (60.2 x 80.4 feet); building envelopes are set back 3 meters (10 feet) to the north, east, and west, and 5 meters (16.4 feet) to the south (street side)
Edge development: Yes
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of stories: 2
Roof type: Flat roof
Style: modern, open
Orientation: south/west
Maximum heights/limits:
Additional regulations: Moderately busy street to the south; a multi-family building is located to the north
Client Requirements
Style, roof type, building type: modern, open, flat roof
Basement, stories: No basement, 2 full stories
Number of occupants, ages: 2 middle-aged adults, 2 children (6 and 1 year old)
Space requirements ground floor, upper floor: Ground floor 100m² (1,076 sq ft), upper floor 80m² (861 sq ft)
Office: family use or home office? Home office
Guests per year: 2 persons, 3 times per year
Open or closed architecture: open
Conservative or modern construction: modern
Open kitchen, kitchen island
Number of dining seats: 8
Fireplace: no
Music/stereo wall: no
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: both yes
Vegetable garden, greenhouse: no
Additional wishes/particulars/daily routine, including reasons for preferences:
Living and dining areas as much as possible facing south
Kitchen with freestanding island and partly open pantry around the corner
House Design
Designed by:
- Planner from a construction company
- Architect
What do you particularly like? Why? Workshop at the back, bicycle stand, size of children’s rooms, master bedroom area on the north side, staircase option 1
What do you dislike? Why? Very small garden, especially between the terrace and neighboring house
Option 1:
Ground floor:
- Bad: Kitchen too small, freestanding kitchen island measuring 2.35m x 1.1m (7.7 x 3.6 feet) does not fit, entrance to living area too narrow
- Good: spacious hallway, open staircase with landing
Upper floor:
- Bad: Access to children’s bathroom through utility room, entrance to master bedroom through dressing room, makeup table in master bedroom instead of dressing room
- Good: spacious master bathroom, size of utility room and children’s bathroom
Option 2:
Ground floor:
- Bad: no staircase landing, small entrance/hallway, entrance to living area directly from the foyer
- Good: large kitchen
Upper floor:
- Bad: utility room too large, entrance to sleeping area awkward (one walks into a wall), makeup table in master bedroom, master bathroom too small
- Good: separate entrance to utility room
Price estimate according to architect/planner: 3,200 €/m2
Personal price limit for house including fixtures: 700,000 €
Preferred heating system: heat pump
If you had to give up some features/finishes, which ones?
- Can give up: open staircase
- Cannot give up: pantry, kitchen with island, utility room on upper floor, children’s bathroom, large dressing room
Why is the design like it is now? For example:
Standard design from the planner? Architect developed options 1 & 2 after consultation
Which of your wishes were implemented by the architect?
A mix of many examples from various magazines...
What do you think are the particular strengths or weaknesses of the design?
Do you have suggestions on how we should plan the living/dining/kitchen area to create an L-shaped layout? There should be space for a kitchen island (2.35m x 1.1m) (7.7 x 3.6 feet). The staircase should be placed centrally in the house to improve the layout of the upper floor rooms.
Any other improvement suggestions?
Many thanks
Cubus3f
Cubus3f schrieb:
What do you think of the floor plan?I don’t like the upper floor at all, but I like the basement three times (?)https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Phew, that is quite a transformation…
I admit: I am not just not a fan, but actually against passages between cars. It’s not only about the mail and parcel delivery people who have to squeeze between vehicles, but also about residents themselves who don’t use a car.
A granny flat without a terrace… how old is the mother-in-law? Does she pay for the basement? Because in return, she gets a dark, basement-like room without a terrace but has to accept a fairly long walk around the house. Almost no natural light reaches the interior of the granny flat due to its location by the window. And what little does get in doesn’t reach the center of the room.
In the south, a granny flat in the basement level (souterrain) would be better situated.
The idea of access on the west side basically costs you the entire west garden. You’re left with barely a meter (about 3 feet) to walk around the house there.
You should consider how you want to use, maintain, and access your outdoor areas. I don’t see this working well for everyday use.
I also find the location of the utility room quite illogical: why accept a long supply line when you could place the utility room in the front corner of the house? My instinct would be to put the utility room and the granny flat at the front. Do you know what the planner was thinking, designing the granny flat with such a long route around the house?
I admit: I am not just not a fan, but actually against passages between cars. It’s not only about the mail and parcel delivery people who have to squeeze between vehicles, but also about residents themselves who don’t use a car.
A granny flat without a terrace… how old is the mother-in-law? Does she pay for the basement? Because in return, she gets a dark, basement-like room without a terrace but has to accept a fairly long walk around the house. Almost no natural light reaches the interior of the granny flat due to its location by the window. And what little does get in doesn’t reach the center of the room.
In the south, a granny flat in the basement level (souterrain) would be better situated.
The idea of access on the west side basically costs you the entire west garden. You’re left with barely a meter (about 3 feet) to walk around the house there.
You should consider how you want to use, maintain, and access your outdoor areas. I don’t see this working well for everyday use.
I also find the location of the utility room quite illogical: why accept a long supply line when you could place the utility room in the front corner of the house? My instinct would be to put the utility room and the granny flat at the front. Do you know what the planner was thinking, designing the granny flat with such a long route around the house?
That must be one pretty nasty mother-in-law to be stashed away in a basement room with access through the light well. The architect seems to have a particular fondness for utility rooms overall – at least, there’s little residential comfort in the design. I don’t have time right now to find the thread, but we once had a case here where the original poster had to share the planner of a multi-family housing project because the developer was also building, if I remember correctly, a single-family house and a duplex next to one or more apartment buildings. I don’t find anything particularly attractive here.
I can only agree with that question. By the way, where does the long pause come from: did you have little time, or did the planner take ages to come up with this stroke of genius?
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
ypg schrieb:
I also find the location of the technical room quite illogical: why accept the long pipe run when you could use the front corner of the house for the utility room?
I can only agree with that question. By the way, where does the long pause come from: did you have little time, or did the planner take ages to come up with this stroke of genius?
https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Similar topics