Floor plan draft for a 220m² single-family house

Why the architect here swapped the panoramic window for a normal window compared to #265, I do not know and have to clarify the day after tomorrow.

Ah yes, that works too. If you don’t value the panorama much there, then make it 76 - wall 99 - 76 = 251 like with the twins shower / entrance. And the window at the dining table then as a fixed element like at the breakfast table.

What’s your take on the master bathroom? Do we still need an additional window there as I last thought? A small window next to the toilet and the balcony door – I don’t know if that already makes it really bright.

Show me the upper floor for that, that surely has also been varied again, if only because of the new window width.

There are errors again in the beams, but this time easily fixable. Otherwise, I like 265/382 about equally.

That wouldn’t apply to the window next to the dining table, but there light would at most be an argument there.

I was referring to the window door from 265, and that still applies, because you don’t use the sliding door for a little ventilation. Unless the two small windows by the couch (but not 76 high, rather the same height as in the office!) can be opened, then the window door can become a fixed element. With a middle post, for symmetry with the office window. Or without, in partner look with the sliding door and the window at the dining table. Now your wife decides that.

At I also said something about your house.

Does the planner inevitably notice the errors in the beams, or should I point them out?

Here is the upper floor plan. And also the front view with the flat roof. The third layout shows, to the left of the sliding door, an alternative of the building, which we decided against.

Ah yes, that also works. If you don't place much value on the panorama there, then do 76 - Wall 99 - 76 = 251 like with the twins Shower / Entrance.

We don't think the panoramic window is bad. I have to ask why it was changed.

Hm, overall much better. Personally, I would still be bothered by the narrow passage from the kitchen to the dining area, but apparently you are not. Two more things: No exit from the kitchen directly into the garden? I wouldn't want that. However, I am also a fresh herb enthusiast and have not only a herb but also a vegetable raised bed outside. To bring the products from there into the kitchen where they are processed, I wouldn't want to always have to walk through the living area. Children's bathroom: I find it suboptimal that when entering the bathroom you immediately "fall" into the shower. I would reconsider the room layout.

Hm, overall much better.

They were actually just small details that changed. What do you find much better now, Climbee?

Personally, I would still be bothered by the narrow passage from the kitchen to the dining area, but apparently you all are not.

1 meter wide... hmm... well, at the moment I don't see what is too small about that. Right now we have 88 cm. If the left kitchen wall should still be moved to the right in favor of the staircase, the passage would have to move anyway to the right of the steel beam. That would create more space. A sliding door is planned here. We don't want an open passage. Therefore, the question is whether a passage with a sliding door should be wider than one meter.

No exit from the kitchen directly to the garden?

Exactly. Previously, the architect had drawn that in. But we never wanted that from the beginning; an angled window was always our idea. The idea of a door never occurred to me. When they drew it in, I immediately asked my wife, but she agreed with me and simply did not want it.

Children’s bathroom: I find it suboptimal that when entering the bathroom, you immediately "fall" into the shower. I would reconsider the room layout.

We will definitely reconsider that. You or someone else already wrote that, and it’s in our minds. I mentioned it recently, but the architect said that it will only be drawn differently at a later stage, when the rough design is final.

The same applies to the furnishing of the office. We are not placing a desk in the middle of the room so that when you enter, you look sideways at the back of the monitor/desk and see all the cables there. I also can’t see a reason now to apparently place necessary power strips in the middle of the floor. The sun probably won’t shine in from that direction. Thus, the desk can stand against the right wall.


Did you also read that the dressing room is supposed to be widened a bit? It would then be somewhat narrower in the bedroom.

Does the planner inevitably notice the errors in the beams or should I point them out?

The structural engineer will do that. They are not wrong in terms of location here either, but in my opinion they are connected incorrectly:



The "green" beams lie/would lie (in the original they end before the dining table) correctly in my view. The structural engineer knows better than I do whether the yellow beams are even needed at all – maybe at half height, hidden in a drywall suspension; and where they run in red, they would lie above window openings. If they do not already collide with the lintels there, then at least (due to space constraints) no roller shutter boxes are possible.

shows an alternative of the building left of the sliding door, which we decided against.

You probably mean that the clinker surface is then not wrapped around the corner to enclose the dining room. Yes, I also liked it better differently.

Children's bathroom: I find it suboptimal that upon entering the bathroom you immediately "fall" into the shower. I would reconsider the room layout.

I just hadn't mentioned that yet, having silently already "postponed" it in my mind: we have to tackle the bathrooms again – but this can be done with fixed wall runs, the dimensions allow sufficient rearrangements. Therefore, the wall positions can be finalized first before the next subthread deals with it.

Today we sat together once again and discussed the further procedure.

The following changes compared to the file attachments are now being incorporated:

- The partition wall between the cloakroom and the airlock will be reinstalled; the cloakroom will be designed more openly for this purpose
- The partition wall between the bedroom and the utility room will be somewhat more massive to allow for a safe to be installed

- Raffstores are planned for the front, aluminum roller shutters for the rear

- By shifting the wall of the master bathroom, a 1.30 m passage between the two wardrobes of the dressing room is created


Further agreements:
- Contrary to yesterday’s thoughts, the two windows to the left of the front door will remain floor-to-ceiling for the sake of the exterior appearance.

- For cost optimization, a full or partial brick cladding will be omitted (and is currently not budgeted). We do not completely rule out closing at most the garage/front door area with the beam above.

- Possible trades to be outsourced were discussed in the areas of electrical, sanitary, flooring installation, and possibly door fitting. Corresponding credit amounts will be forwarded to me.

- I recently posted two different hipped roof variants. I now have the pitch angles. The flatter roof has a pitch of 15°, the other 22.5°. When we both looked again at both variants from various perspectives, we agreed that the 22.5° variant does not really suit the house. We both liked the 15° variant significantly better—especially viewed from the rear of the building. I also inquired again about the shed roof option, but I was told that was not really an option. The ceiling/wall of the building facing the garden would have to be increased so massively that costs would rise significantly. Also, vetoes from the building authority could not be excluded. The only option besides the 15° shallow hipped roof would be the already visualized flat roof with overhang, which, however, costs €3,000 more and in my view does not provide any real added value.

- It is proposed to build the house with Poroton bricks. This is sufficient for sound insulation, as the windows pose more likely weak points rather than the house walls.

I was also presented today with the calculation after the structural simplifications compared to the original design.

The partially basemented house with 232 m² living area on the ground and upper floors plus 19.55 m² roof terrace is priced at approx. €630,000 excluding painter, flooring, incidental construction costs, and external work.

Adding painter (€25,000 realistically?), flooring, landscaping costs, demolition... and the incidental construction costs, the total comes to approx. €830,000. In addition to the description of the construction services, the €630,000 already includes:
- higher-quality interior doors at 2.13 m height
- sliding door in the living room
- security package E2, laminated safety glass, and Maco-Tronic for windows and doors (almost RC2)
- controlled residential ventilation
- water softening system
- geothermal heat pump Waterkotte AI 1
- threshold sealing of the terrace doors
- empty conduit for a future photovoltaic system
- €10,000 additional budget for electrical work over the construction service description

This would almost completely consume the entire budget except for a few thousand euros.

Therefore, I am now trying to optimize costs somewhat, as a kitchen is still needed and I do not believe that €10,000 for the electrical budget in addition to the construction service description level will suffice. A hole for a ceiling spotlight costs about €100. And an alarm system must also be installed.

Perhaps savings can initially be made on the landscaping work, which is budgeted at €52,000, and items could be added there later. That would be sensible, because otherwise savings would first have to be made in areas like the bathroom and the level of the construction service description would have to be accepted.

One of my ideas for optimization was for the architect to try representing the masonry garage as a prefabricated garage. We will see how that works without too much affecting the character of the exterior appearance. However, the garage would then only be 6x6 meters. This point alone, however, would positively settle any budget considerations.

Otherwise, I do not see much optimization potential without starting from scratch... perhaps one could do without the recently created kitchen corner, which would be about €10,000, and a water softening system can also be purchased later—it is quantified here at €3,800.

In total, despite the costs being about €30,000 higher than I had thought, I am optimistic. The house now looks the way we wish.