That would bother me too. You can communicate something like that to the architect – what stands out here in a particularly negative way is that there is unused space behind the sofa and, on top of that, a terrace door. I keep wondering what the trained planner was thinking.
Temporary thing. I guess you could neglect that if it’s not also supposed to be the place where the Christmas tree will be hung ;)
I want to point out that in the dining area a 1.40 table with 6 seats is drawn in, which practically doesn’t work. Draw a 180/200 table with 4 seats or 220/240 with 6 seats, and you will see how little space there is. The windows in the private rooms: why are they floor-to-ceiling? Should everyone be able to look under the belt line?
As I said: The space behind the sofa is indeed “unused,” but necessary for the proper distance to the speakers. Still, we are not really satisfied with it.
How do you come to think that it is a 1.40 table? In the drawing the table is 1.80 x 1.10 large. Accordingly, 2.40 would also fit comfortably. You can also rotate the table by 90°.
We really need to rethink the floor-to-ceiling windows on the upper floor, thanks for the hint!
I find two “mistakes” in
“befreundet” and “Innen.” In my view, you need an architect – I already mentioned this in post #19. The new version still doesn’t really wow me. I see a departure from the single-flight staircase – but not the knot that would have been solved. The design still looks to me like that of a 150 sqm house. I don’t see the additional square meters in it – and if slow zones can still occur in the sofa area, they obviously were not incorporated there either. Maybe an interior architect helps there as much as an ENT doctor when you have “back” problems?
I don’t exactly understand how the design looks like that of a 150 sqm house? So, in which specific places is it too tight or does it feel too small? For us, everything except the sofa area is fairly well thought out, so we currently don’t see the need to consult an external architect.
