Hello everyone,
we are currently working on our floor plan and are starting to get a bit frustrated.
We have now had an optimal floor plan created for us.
We are very satisfied with everything except that the child II room feels too narrow.
The depth in the entrance area (child II) is about 2.5 m (8 feet 2 inches). The depth in the lower section is about 2.37 m (7 feet 9 inches). For comparison: child I is approximately 3.58 m by 5.0 m (11 feet 9 inches by 16 feet 5 inches).
According to our draftsman, this is due to the fact that, according to the current DIN standard, stairs must have a minimum tread depth of 260 mm (10 inches). This makes the staircase significantly longer than in the floor plans we previously reviewed.
Maybe someone here has a good idea on how to still improve this situation.
We appreciate any suggestions.
we are currently working on our floor plan and are starting to get a bit frustrated.
We have now had an optimal floor plan created for us.
We are very satisfied with everything except that the child II room feels too narrow.
The depth in the entrance area (child II) is about 2.5 m (8 feet 2 inches). The depth in the lower section is about 2.37 m (7 feet 9 inches). For comparison: child I is approximately 3.58 m by 5.0 m (11 feet 9 inches by 16 feet 5 inches).
According to our draftsman, this is due to the fact that, according to the current DIN standard, stairs must have a minimum tread depth of 260 mm (10 inches). This makes the staircase significantly longer than in the floor plans we previously reviewed.
Maybe someone here has a good idea on how to still improve this situation.
We appreciate any suggestions.
A
Allthewayup3 Feb 2023 19:41Tassimat schrieb:
Is it even possible to build the design without additional columns in the living room?Now that you mention it, the short wall sections in the living/dining area, large windows, and spans do look quite ambitious. The structural engineer will probably have something to say about that. How are the loads supposed to be transferred there? That will require substantial lintels already, and because of the small wall sections, these walls will essentially act as columns. If it’s technically feasible at all, I can see the costs for reinforcing steel just flying up.So, to the main question:
Child’s bedroom 2 has over 18 m² (194 sq ft) of floor space. There’s no need to make compromises; it fits well with the style of the rest of the house. A double bed also fits comfortably into the “niche.” For teenagers, it really doesn’t matter if they get into bed from the foot end.
Peppoderwilde schrieb:
We are very happy with everything except that the second child's bedroom feels too narrow.
The depth at the entrance area (Child II) is about 2.5 m (8 feet 2 inches). The depth in the lower section is about 2.37 m (7 feet 9 inches). For comparison: Child I is about 3.58 m (11 feet 9 inches) by 5.0 m (16 feet 5 inches).
Child’s bedroom 2 has over 18 m² (194 sq ft) of floor space. There’s no need to make compromises; it fits well with the style of the rest of the house. A double bed also fits comfortably into the “niche.” For teenagers, it really doesn’t matter if they get into bed from the foot end.
X
xMisterDx3 Feb 2023 21:45Do you have the budget for such a large house? Of course, you can design a 22m² (237 sq ft) bedroom and then place only a 4m² (43 sq ft) bed inside. Or a 14m² (150 sq ft) long, narrow bathroom, which could also be arranged to fit into 10m² (108 sq ft). And so on.
S
Sunshine3873 Feb 2023 23:09Yes. The floor plan is not really successful in terms of dimensions. A lot of unnecessary space is wasted for a lot of money. The house can easily be built with 160 m2 (1,722 sq ft) without unnecessary hallways or corners, achieving almost the same result.
Tassimat schrieb:
Is it possible to build the design without additional columns in the living room?At least with lightweight walls on the upper floor, yes.https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
Similar topics