ᐅ Single-family home plot purchased – opinions on architect’s design
Created on: 15 Jul 2020 22:45
M
maleba89
We have purchased our building plot and have just received the drawings from our architect.
I wanted to gather some opinions and suggestions. Perhaps you have some ideas or feedback.
We also received another version of the plans with the same layout, but 1 meter (3 feet) shorter in length and 0.5 meter (20 inches) less in depth, although the floor plan remains the same.
We are considering positioning the house angled toward the street and orienting it more toward the south. The zoning plan / building permit allows this.
The stream on the property is piped underground, and building is permitted up to the stream boundary, provided no structural loads are placed over it. A terrace is allowed in that area.
I wanted to gather some opinions and suggestions. Perhaps you have some ideas or feedback.
We also received another version of the plans with the same layout, but 1 meter (3 feet) shorter in length and 0.5 meter (20 inches) less in depth, although the floor plan remains the same.
We are considering positioning the house angled toward the street and orienting it more toward the south. The zoning plan / building permit allows this.
The stream on the property is piped underground, and building is permitted up to the stream boundary, provided no structural loads are placed over it. A terrace is allowed in that area.
Nida35a schrieb:
Spacious floor plans are desirable and appreciated. Not every house needs to be optimized down to the last square meter.But at least the smaller, secondary spaces should be optimized. For example, the cloakroom is incredibly uncomfortable, tiny, and even serves as a passageway. That’s a no-go for me—I would definitely avoid it, even with a waist size of 38.
The 180cm (71 inches) in the kitchen is rather excessive; 90–100 up to a maximum of 120cm (35–39 up to 47 inches) would be sufficient.
PS: With a pitched roof and a knee wall under 150cm (59 inches), the toilet won’t fit. For the bathtub and other furniture, realistic dimensions must be drawn in. I would also avoid the bathtub planned for this house, as it is too small. Therefore, it makes sense to check the dimensions of all other rooms regarding their usability... for instance, the bed doesn’t actually fit in the bedroom as it is now.
H
hampshire13 Sep 2020 22:27Nida35a schrieb:
Spacious floor plans can be desirable and appreciated. Not every house needs to be optimized down to the last square meter.I completely agree with you. However, in the end, I don’t find it coherent. The "spaciousness" here neither creates a better sense of space nor more usable area. Some of the utility rooms are quite cramped, while the circulation spaces are large. If the circulation area were made into something special, like a central atrium (though the building is too small for that) or an impressive staircase, I could see the appeal. But I don’t see that here. Sure, the house can be lived in comfortably—I don’t doubt that. It’s just a pity about the money invested in cubic meters without really gaining much.
What could be done better within the given requirements—I don’t know. As an architect, I would question those requirements.
ypg schrieb:
For example, the wardrobe is really uncomfortable and tiny, and it’s even used as a passageway. That’s a no-go for me—I would definitely avoid it, even with a waist size of 38.
The 180cm (70.9 inches) in the kitchen is probably too much; 90/100cm (35.4/39.4 inches) up to a maximum of 120cm (47.2 inches) would be sufficient.
So it makes sense to check all the other rooms’ dimensions based on their intended use… the bed doesn’t actually fit in the bedroom as it is now… The bed in the drawing is 2m x 2.2m (6.6 x 7.2 feet) and fits well.
In the kitchen, there must be at least 120cm (47.2 inches) between the island and the work areas. We already consulted a kitchen specialist, and anything less than 120cm (47.2 inches) is definitely too tight for comfortable work.
maleba89 schrieb:
So the bed in the drawing is 2m x 2.2m (6.6 ft x 7.2 ft) and fits quite well. No way... you can’t even sit upright on the bed positioned at the top of the plan, and as planned, I wouldn’t want my bed like that—it would actually be a deal breaker for me.
maleba89 schrieb:
In the kitchen, there must be at least 120cm (47 inches) between the island and the workspace. There is no strict requirement, and if there were, anything less than 120cm (47 inches) would be prohibited. However, for many cooking enthusiasts, any distance greater than that is too far for efficient cooking and should be avoided. A knowledgeable kitchen designer understands this!
hampshire schrieb:
What could be improved within the given requirements – I don’t know. As an architect, I would challenge the requirements.Where did I miss the part about there being any requirements? A female architect had already worked on it and delivered a McMansion Hell Scandimerican Farmhouse 80’s Edition; the clients have since moderated this with a counter-proposal to a more typical cross-gabled villa. This may still not be attractive by any means, but it is relatively a commendable improvement. I recommend as the next step to develop another counter-proposal – but this time abstractly at the conceptual level – rather than working out a concrete set of floor plans in detail.https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/
H
hampshire14 Sep 2020 08:0811ant schrieb:
Oh, did I miss that there were any requirements discussed?Post #65.Similar topics