ᐅ Single-family house with a pitched roof, without a basement – feedback welcome

Fummelbrett schrieb:
No, the sink is located opposite the door in the laundry room. It would have been pointless to install another sink inside there.

I’m sorry to say this, but the urinal has such a presence in this room, especially without a lid, that I would feel uneasy sitting on the toilet. The way it is positioned, you end up sitting with your face near the urinal, right? Is this a special size? Aren’t there smaller ones than 8cm (3 inches) available now?

Exactly, Katja...

For me, a small hand basin would probably have been installed instead of a urinal.

I think the distance between the urinal and the toilet is sufficient. It just looks shortened due to the perspective. But I would never design a bathroom like that. However, I am a fan of having a urinal in the guest toilet because there are always those persistent, unteachable men who prefer to stand - if there is enough space for it. I would never replace a hand basin with a urinal, not even if it were at the “nose level” of the toilet.

That’s why our guest toilet doesn’t have one...

I also have café curtains on the windows. They are attractive and provide privacy where needed without blocking the view outside.

This is not a guest toilet. This is the toilet in our laundry room. It’s used when we’re working in the garden or on the house. And the door is usually just left ajar anyway ^^ yes, the urinal is quite noticeable – it was added later during construction. But since only we use this toilet, I don’t mind. And it does get cleaned regularly, of course.

derpikniker schrieb:
Make a counterproposal.

Unfortunately, my kitchen intuition only goes as far as recognizing what’s poorly done – I’m not a kitchen expert. Besides, I agree with Yvonne’s assessment of how unappreciated such efforts would be.

derpikniker schrieb:
An attentive observer sees no connection between the garage and the house in the current plan (from last night).

An attentive observer only sees a “removed” door between the two, but the rigid alignment between house and garage remains fully intact.

derpikniker schrieb:
Meaning exactly in front of the only sensibly usable windows in the living room?

Who says there’s a living room there, or that those are its only sensibly usable windows? You’re fixated and bound to your flawed design.

derpikniker schrieb:
I have time and a very good spatial imagination.

You don’t, and I can see that clearly without glasses. Otherwise, not only I but also you yourself would have long ago painfully realized the fundamental flaw in this design – and it’s not just the financing partner who only has decision authority up to 160 square meters (around 1700 square feet).

Namely – and I noticed this as soon as I turned the corner to the start of this thread:

The house has a continuous depth that extends from the main building through the intersecting garage to the garage structure.

On the south side, the setback from the boundary limits the possible depth and effectively sets this dimension for the entire rectangular layout.

The real constraints you’re imposing are coupling the garages to each other, and secondly storing them so they cannot be shifted away from the house structure.

If you had even the slightest awareness of subtle cause-and-effect relationships, you would realize that the dimensions of the utility room and the location of the refrigerator are merely symptoms of this rigid ankle joint.

Everything flows, and that applies in reverse too: this floor plan suffers from chronic congestion – take the stick out of the chakra!

---

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

11ant schrieb:
Unfortunately, my kitchen expertise only allows me to recognize what is poorly done—I’m not a kitchen specialist. Also, I agree with Yvonne’s assessment of how unappreciated such effort would be.

A careful observer will see just a "painted-over" passage door, while the rigid alignment between house and garage remains fully intact.

Who says that’s a living room, or even that it has the only logically usable window? You’re fixated and bound to your flawed layout.

You don’t have that, and I can see that clearly without glasses. Otherwise, not only I but you yourself would long ago have painfully noticed the fundamental flaws in the design—and it’s not about the financing partner limited to decisions only up to 160 square meters (1,722 square feet).

Namely—and I already saw this when I turned the corner to enter this thread:

The house has a continuous depth that runs through the main building, the intersecting garage, and the garage structure.

To the south, the setback from the property boundary limits the possible depth and effectively fixes this dimension for the entire rectangular layout.

You then effectively lock in the constraints by first coupling the garages together and second by positioning them so they cannot be shifted against the main building.

If you had even a hint of understanding of subtle causal relationships, you would realize that the dimensions of the utility room and the location of the refrigerator are just secondary effects of this rigid “ankle fixation.”

Panta rei also works in reverse: this floor plan suffers from chronic blockage—take the stick out of the chakra!

Whatever you just smoked, I need some too.