ᐅ Floor plan of a detached single-family house approximately 200 square meters without a basement
Created on: 1 May 2024 15:31
B
Bobby007
Hello,
after several failed attempts, we have found a floor plan that at least meets our requirements. We would appreciate your opinions and ideas regarding the room layout and usage, especially on the ground floor. The missing mudroom still seems to be a major issue at the moment.
Please disregard the positioning of the interior doors.
Development plan / restrictions
Plot size: 463 sqm (4982 sq ft)
Site ratio / floor area ratio: no development plan available
Building envelope, building line, and boundaries: ---> see site plan
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of floors: 2
Roof type: gable roof
Architectural style: traditional --> no specific requirements
Orientation: no specifications
Maximum heights / limits: no development plan --> §34
Client requirements
Style, roof type, building type: traditional single-family home, gable roof, monolithic construction
Basement, floors: 1.5 – 2 floors, additional cost for basement too high (approx. 130k)
Number of occupants, ages: still 4 (39 years, 37, 6, 4, 0)
Space requirements on ground floor (GF) and upper floor (UF):
- GF: gym with minimum 16 sqm (172 sq ft) mandatory, living room, dining area, kitchen, utility room, WC
- UF: sleeping area, 3 children’s rooms, bathroom, home office
Open or closed layout: open living and dining area
Conservative or modern: rather conservative
Open kitchen, kitchen island: yes
Number of seats at dining table: 8
Fireplace: yes
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: garage
Utility garden, greenhouse: play lawn
House design
Planner: architect following our specifications
What do you especially like? Why?
Large living and dining area on the ground floor; the space on the upper floor is, in our opinion, well used to accommodate 5 rooms.
What do you not like? Why?
We find the layout on the ground floor is not yet optimal, especially the missing mudroom at the entrance. That is why the entrance area is currently a bit awkward, trying to possibly locate the cloakroom there. We would like to rotate the staircase, but this would lead to a loss of space upstairs.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: 650k --> according to initial offers, it will be less, excluding exterior landscaping
Personal price limit for the house including fittings: 800k
Preferred heating system: air-source heat pump with additional water storage tank
If you had to give up something, which details or extensions
You cannot give up: large garage, gym on the ground floor, 5 rooms upstairs
Why does the design look the way it does? For example:
The architect implemented our specifications within the constraints of the plot shape. Ultimately, we would not want to change the "shell" anymore. We do not yet find the spatial layout, especially on the ground floor, optimal. We would appreciate suggestions or ideas for improvements.
after several failed attempts, we have found a floor plan that at least meets our requirements. We would appreciate your opinions and ideas regarding the room layout and usage, especially on the ground floor. The missing mudroom still seems to be a major issue at the moment.
Please disregard the positioning of the interior doors.
Development plan / restrictions
Plot size: 463 sqm (4982 sq ft)
Site ratio / floor area ratio: no development plan available
Building envelope, building line, and boundaries: ---> see site plan
Number of parking spaces: 2
Number of floors: 2
Roof type: gable roof
Architectural style: traditional --> no specific requirements
Orientation: no specifications
Maximum heights / limits: no development plan --> §34
Client requirements
Style, roof type, building type: traditional single-family home, gable roof, monolithic construction
Basement, floors: 1.5 – 2 floors, additional cost for basement too high (approx. 130k)
Number of occupants, ages: still 4 (39 years, 37, 6, 4, 0)
Space requirements on ground floor (GF) and upper floor (UF):
- GF: gym with minimum 16 sqm (172 sq ft) mandatory, living room, dining area, kitchen, utility room, WC
- UF: sleeping area, 3 children’s rooms, bathroom, home office
Open or closed layout: open living and dining area
Conservative or modern: rather conservative
Open kitchen, kitchen island: yes
Number of seats at dining table: 8
Fireplace: yes
Balcony, roof terrace: no
Garage, carport: garage
Utility garden, greenhouse: play lawn
House design
Planner: architect following our specifications
What do you especially like? Why?
Large living and dining area on the ground floor; the space on the upper floor is, in our opinion, well used to accommodate 5 rooms.
What do you not like? Why?
We find the layout on the ground floor is not yet optimal, especially the missing mudroom at the entrance. That is why the entrance area is currently a bit awkward, trying to possibly locate the cloakroom there. We would like to rotate the staircase, but this would lead to a loss of space upstairs.
Price estimate according to architect/planner: 650k --> according to initial offers, it will be less, excluding exterior landscaping
Personal price limit for the house including fittings: 800k
Preferred heating system: air-source heat pump with additional water storage tank
If you had to give up something, which details or extensions
You cannot give up: large garage, gym on the ground floor, 5 rooms upstairs
Why does the design look the way it does? For example:
The architect implemented our specifications within the constraints of the plot shape. Ultimately, we would not want to change the "shell" anymore. We do not yet find the spatial layout, especially on the ground floor, optimal. We would appreciate suggestions or ideas for improvements.
H
hanghaus20232 May 2024 19:12Bobby007 schrieb:
We would prefer not to widen the garage because that would reduce our already small garden. You will thank me later. The half meter (0.5 m / 1.6 ft) also helps to move the entrance closer to the middle of the house. Do you really only need one parking space? I already asked what the local authority requires in terms of building permits/planning permission.
Since my suggestion is slightly shorter, it results in saving 0.5 m (1.6 ft) of garden space. No one will notice that. Besides, you gain garden space on the south side.
H
hanghaus20232 May 2024 19:25I have revised my design. Earlier, I only adjusted the text. Now the house as well.
Bobby007 schrieb:
The 1.55 meters (5 feet) at the back provide space for a narrow passage,Where is this passage supposed to lead? You’re keeping something from us...Bobby007 schrieb:
We apparently wanted too much and will now make some changes.Right now, I have no idea what you actually want.Bobby007 schrieb:
The version with the entrance area on the east side is great and we will implement it that way, even though it completely disrupts the current floor plan. In fact, we have already received approval for the setback areas and would only shorten the third gable slightly.It would be polite to clarify what I criticized in post #10.hanghaus2023 schrieb:
That ultimately results in 0.5 meters (1.5 feet) less garden.I’m also in the group that prefers giving up three meters (10 feet) at the back rather than losing three meters (10 feet) at the front. It’s noticeable in the front, not in the back.ypg schrieb:
Where is the passage supposed to lead? You’re withholding information from us... That would be deliberately withholding information, which is not the case. We left this passage open after consulting with the neighbors. Additionally, the garage borders the neighbor’s fence.
ypg schrieb:
I honestly don’t know what you want at the moment. We are both quite uncreative and only have our ideas about the number of rooms.
I am attaching an enlarged view of the site plan again....
H
hanghaus20233 May 2024 15:29Then you are still too close to the street.
I am not sure if you also have to comply with the usual 5 m (16.4 ft) setback in front of the garage.
I am not sure if you also have to comply with the usual 5 m (16.4 ft) setback in front of the garage.
Similar topics